
Class HM^ijS 

Book -ffj Z ^ 



PRESENTED BY 



0- . 




THE STANDARD RATE IN AMERICAN 
TRADE UNIONS 



THE STANDARD RATE IN AMERICAN 
TRADE UNIONS 



BY 
DAVID A. MCCABE 

I! < 



A DISSERTATION 

Submitted to the Board of University Studies of The Johns 
Hopkins University in Conformity with the Requirements 
for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 
1909 



BALTIMORE 
1912 






* 



Copyright 191 2 by 
THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS 

•1ft 

JUL-29 '9lt 



Press of 

The New Era printing Company 

lancaster. pa. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

Preface vii 

Introduction 9 

Chapter I. The Piece Scale 18 

i. Differentiation of the Rate 19 

Form of the product 23 

Materials used 49 

Physical conditions 54 

Price of the finished article 55 

11. Definition of Work 5 s 

Auxiliary work 59 

Payment of helpers 61 

III. Abnormally Difficult Conditions of Production 65 

The turn system 69 

Chapter II. The Standard Time Rate 77 

I. Rate Grouping by Kind of Work 82 

11. Rate Grouping by Competency 94 

in. The Union Rate and Actual Wages 106 

Provision for payment above the minimum.. 106 

Union policy and the minimum 108 

Wages and efficiency 114 

Chapter III. The Area of the Standard Rate 120 

1. Area of Piece Scales 121 

Local scales 124 

Sectional scales 128 

National scales 14 2 

11. Area of Time Rates 163 

Local rates 163 

Sectional rates 166 

National rates 17 1 

Conflict of rates 178 

in. Comparison of Piece and Time Rates i8r 

Chapter IV. The Form of the Rate 185 

1. Attitude of the Unions 185 

11. Objections to Piece Work 212 

in. Acceptable Conditions for Piece Work 225 

Appendices k . 233 

A. Calculation of Output in Mule Spinning 233 

B. Premium and Bonus Systems of Payment 235 

v 



PREFACE 

This monograph had its origin in an investigation carried 
on by the author while a member of the Economic Seminary 
of the Johns Hopkins University. It was submitted as a 
dissertation in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the 
degree of Doctor of Philosophy from that institution in 
June, 1909. Some portions of it have been amplified and 
other parts rewritten since that time, but the discussion has 
not been brought beyond that date. 

The chief documentary source of information has been 
the collection of trade-union publications in the Johns Hop- 
kins Library. This documentary study has been supple- 
mented by personal interviews with national trade-union 
officials and with local union officers and employers of labor 
in a number of industrial centers. The writer wishes to 
record here his deep appreciation of the patience and kind- 
ness of the many union officers and employers who have 
supplied him with information. The writer desires also to 
express his deep indebtedness to Professor Jacob H. Hol- 
lander and Professor George E. Barnett, under whose guid- 
ance the study was undertaken and carried on, for valuable 
suggestions and criticism at every stage of the work. 



Vll 



THE STANDARD RATE IN AMERICAN 
TRADE UNIONS 



INTRODUCTION 

By the term " standard rate," as employed in the present 
monograph, is meant a rate of wages fixed by a trade union 
as payment for a given product or for work of a given 
duration in a particular trade or branch of a trade, and 
binding on the members of the union engaged on that prod- 
uct or in that branch of industry. 1 It may thus be either a 
piece rate or a time rate. In either case it is " standard " 
because it rests uniformly and impersonally upon all the 
members of the union whom it is designed to affect; it is 
applied to the work the member is engaged upon, not to the 
individual member himself. The union does not ordinarily 
rate each individual separately according to his personal 
qualifications or circumstances, but fixes one rate as a 
standard for the group. In the few cases in which a union 
fixes rates separately for individual members, 2 the rates are 
" union " rates, but they are not standard rates in the sense 
in which this term is here used. 

1 The use of the term in this sense differs somewhat from the 
practice of American trade unionists. " Standard rate " is not often 
used by unionists, the term " union rate " being more commonly 
employed. When used, it is usually in reference to the time rate 
only, although even here the term " minimum rate " is more common. 
In a few unions, however, the term " standard rate " is still occa- 
sionally used to denote the rate received by the average workman, or 
by the bulk of workmen, irrespective of whether this be the estab- 
lished minimum. Some years ago, it was customary in a few trades 
to refer to the amount which the workman of average skill was 
expected to earn in a day under the piece-work system as the 
" standard rate"; but this usage barely survives, if at all (see below, 
p. 80). Finally it should be noted that in applying the term 
" standard rate " to the prevailing type of union rate herein de- 
scribed, the present writer is following the usage established by 
Sidney and Beatrice Webb in "Industrial Democracy" (1902 ed., 
p. 279). 

2 For a description of such cases, see below, p. 77. 



10 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

The maintenance of standard rates has always been a 
leading feature of American trade-union wage policies. 
The unions have from the first sought to attain their pri- 
mary purpose of advancing wages by substituting collect- 
ively established rates of wages for those which their mem- 
bers could obtain by competition in isolated wage bargains. 
Almost universally their efforts in this direction have taken 
the form of the establishment and enforcement of standard 
rates. In the present study the standard rate is considered 
solely as a device for securing effective union participation 
in the determination of wage rates by union bargaining or 
by collective enforcement. The standard rate is regarded 
as a trade-union device, as a piece of union mechanism, and 
attention is directed entirely toward questions of form and 
extent of application, and especially to the manner in which 
it fulfills its purpose of enabling the union to bring its col- 
lective strength to bear in behalf of the individual member 
in the settlement of actual wages. The amounts of the vari- 
ous rates maintained by the respective unions, the forms of 
collective bargaining by which the rate is fixed and the social 
implications of the standard rate are subjects outside the 
scope of the present study. 

The standard rate is ordinarily expressed as a minimum 
rate. Members are allowed to receive more than the stand- 
ard rate, but for a member to work for less, unless specific- 
ally exempted by the union, is a violation of the union rule. 
The establishment of a standard rate does not, therefore, 
necessarily secure to the unions complete participation in 
the settlement of the wage rate to be paid in each individual 
case. Such full participation would require that the union 
rate should be the actual rate paid to each workman. Union 
piece prices are almost always the rates actually paid, for 
there is ordinarily no good reason why the employers should 
pay one member more per piece than another for the same 
kind of work. Standard time rates, however, are, with few 



Introduction 1 1 

exceptions, 1 not only nominally but actually minimum rates, 
leaving it necessary for individual settlements to determine 
in each case whether and to what extent the rate to be 
actually paid shall exceed the standard. 

Piece rates as contrasted with time rates are therefore in- 
trinsically better adapted to collective action. Since those 
who are working by the piece on the same kinds of product 
or parts of a product ordinarily are paid at the same rate, 
they all have a common interest in the rate. But there is 
no such advantageous rallying point in the matter of time 
wages. Indeed there is a natural tendency in time wages 
to variation on account of differences in competency among 
the workmen. In the case of the piece rate, or of the 
normal work day, on the contrary, the union makes a uni- 
form demand, which is assumed to advance the interests of 
all alike, and can be easily made the subject of union bar- 
gaining for the group as a whole. 

Bargaining for time wages thus presents an inherent diffi- 
culty. It is not reducible to a uniform demand which is to 
affect all alike. On the other hand the policy of establish- 
ing a distinct time rate for each individual worker has not 
commended itself to the unions. 1 This policy would give 
the union full control of actual wages, if it could be en- 
forced; but the union rate would in each case apply to an 
individual only. There would be collective action, but not 
for a rate with collective application. As actually in vogue, 
the standard time rate may not give complete union determi- 
nation of actual wages ; but it does make possible a rate of 
collective application. It has the advantage of simplicity 
as a means of determining wages for a considerable number 
of men in collective bargaining and as an obligation to be 
enforced by the union. In choosing to enforce minimum 
time rates rather than actual individual rates the unions 
have surrendered a possible complete participation in the 
determination of actual wages in favor of a kind of union 
rate which makes much more feasible the establishment by 

1 See below, p. 77. 



12 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

union bargaining, or — in the absence of a union agreement 
with the employer — by collective enforcement, of the rates 
adopted by the union. 

There is also a distinction between standard piece and 
time rates in the extent to which they are established by 
union agreement with the employer. Practically all union 
piece rates that are enforced are established by collective 
agreement. 1 Union piece rates can hardly be enforced 
unless they are accepted, tacitly at least, by the employer, 
since the standardization of the unit of product can hardly 
be accomplished by a series of individual negotiations. The 
bargaining process would be too frequently recurrent to 
insure that each individual worker would secure the union 
rate for each varying unit of product as it appears in the 
course of his work. The standard time rate, on the other 
hand, does not present the same necessity for union bar- 
gaining for its successful use as a means of giving the union 
an effective participation in the wage settlements of its 
members. Adherence to a minimum by the members in 
their separate contracts with their employers presents no 
technical bargaining difficulties for the individual workers. 
The time standard is, however, extensively made the sub- 
ject of union bargaining. Although the adoption and ob- 
servance by the union of standard rates which have not 
been formally accepted by employers is not uncommon, it 
is unusual for a union to attempt to put in force a higher 



1 There are three sets of conditions under which wage bargaining 
may be carried on with the use of a standard rate. First, a bargain 
may be made by the union covering the rate actually to be paid to 
all in the group. This exhausts the necessity of bargaining in the 
matter of wages. The union is here the party to the wage contract 
from the side of the employees to the exclusion of the individual 
members. In the second case, the union agrees with the employer 
on a minimum rate, but each individual may also make a wage bar- 
gain with reference to the amount above the minimum which is to be 
paid. In the third case, while the union does not appear in a wage 
bargain and the individual alone contracts with the employer, the 
member in his wage settlement is required by his union to observe 
a minimum fixed by the union. The third case is obviously distinct 
from the first two in that the union as such does not bargain with 
the employer. 



Introduction 13 

minimum rate without notifying the employers in advance 
of its intention and inviting from them individually or col- 
lectively an expression of willingness to recognize it. Very 
often the rate for a specified period is agreed upon in con- 
ference by the union representatives and the employers and 
embodied in a written contract. 

The problems which arise in the use of the standard piece 
rate are chiefly technical problems of formulation and en- 
forcement growing out of the adjustment of rates to meet 
many varieties of product. In bargaining for and regulating 
time wages the difficulty in standardization is due to the dif- 
fering capacities of the men ; in bargaining for and regulating 
wages for piece workers the difficulties are mostly technical 
difficulties in standardizing rates for varieties of types, 
styles, and patterns of product. In this respect the fixing 
of piece wages might be contrasted, for example, with the 
fixing of the length of the normal work day. When the 
number of hours per day is to be determined by union bar- 
gain or rule the whole matter of the hours of labor is set- 
tled once for all when one amount is agreed upon. But 
when piece wages are to be bargained for, as many different 
rates must be settled upon as there are different kinds of 
product involved. 

It is of course the schedule of piece rates as a whole, the 
piece "scale," which is the center of interest in the regu- 
lation of piece wages in any given trade. It is upon all the 
standard rates taken collectively that the union relies to 
secure standardization of the piece wages in its trade. The 
rate problem of the piece-working unions is therefore one 
of maintaining a scale which will standardize all the rates 
actually paid and do away with the necessity for individual 
bargaining for the rate actually to be paid in any particular 
case. The formulation and application of a schedule of rates 
which will accomplish this fully is obviously not without its 
difficulties. 

The two essential characteristics of a piece scale which is 



14 Standard Rate in American trade Unions 

to standardize rates satisfactorily are comprehensiveness 
and clearness. Comprehensiveness is the first essential. 
Obviously the union does not participate to the full in wage 
determination if a union rate is not set for every contin- 
gency which can reasonably be made the subject of wage 
bargaining. It is regarded as highly desirable by the piece- 
working unions that the rate to be paid in every such case 
should be set down in the regular scale. If work is done of 
a kind or under conditions not provided for in the existing 
scale, the rate to be paid, temporarily at least, may have to 
be settled upon with the employer by an individual or indi- 
viduals. In many cases, to be sure, it is settled by a local or 
shop committee. But such a committee is usually repre- 
sentative of fewer members and has less bargaining strength 
than the body which regularly contracts for the scale. The 
rates it may establish are union rates, but they have not the 
standard character of the rates embodied in the regular 
scale. 1 

Clearness is an essential complement of comprehensive- 
ness. Not only must rates be established to cover all varie- 
ties of product and conditions which call for distinct rating 
in practice, but each rate must be laid down so clearly that 
there is no doubt as to which kind of product and under 
what conditions it applies. If there is uncertainty or mis- 
understanding as to whether a particular rate in the scale 
applies in a given case the necessity remains of further bar- 
gaining to determine the rate which shall actually be paid, 
and often under circumstances which may make it unusually 

1 The regular scale is very seldom thoroughly comprehensive, since 
new and special kinds of work appear from time to time in the in- 
tervals between scale m revisions. The regular list in nearly every 
case covers of necessity only the varieties of product which have 
been made up to the time of its construction or revision. New 
and special work must be priced, provisionally at least, by the em- 
ployers and shop committees in the plant in which it appears. This 
is not seriously felt as a difficulty unless this unrated work forms 
a considerable portion of the whole and is difficult to price by 
comparison with the work already rated in the regular list. Where 
the latter situation exists it is regarded as an objection to the piece 
system, inasmuch as it opens the way to misunderstandings and to 
nonuniformities in rate for a large part of the product. 



Introduction 15 

difficult to reach a decision without friction. Clearness is 
particularly important if the scale applies in several sepa- 
rate localities. In such cases a misunderstanding in a par- 
ticular shop must be taken up by a body not only of less 
bargaining strength than that which made the scale, but one 
whose interpretation is less authoritative for the employer. 
Uniform application without disputes of regular scale rates 
to all the work to be done is the union ideal in piece-rate 
regulation and for this both comprehensiveness and clear- 
ness are indispensable. The nature of the difficulties which 
arise in constructing comprehensive and clear scales and 
the contingencies which have to be provided for, as these 
appear in practice and are met in existing piece-rate sys- 
tems, will be described in Chapter I of the present study. 

The questions of chief interest in the employment of the 
time standard rate grow out of the fact that, as workmen 
are found, there are variations in efficiency in practically 
every group of workers. If the union is to secure effective 
participation in wage determination the minimum rate must 
be so adjusted that a relatively large proportion of the 
workmen covered by a particular rate will be favorably 
affected in a perceptible way by its existence. The basis 
chosen for the inclusion of workers within a given rate 
group very largely determines the difficulty of reaching this 
result. If the groups are so divided that the members of 
each are of almost equal wage-earning capacity the mini- 
mum rate will stand in approximately the same relation to 
the wages of all the members of the group. In such a case 
the use of the standard rate for time wages seems to reap 
a maximum of union advantage. If, however, the members 
employed in a given trade or branch of a trade vary consid- 
erably in worth to the employer, unless they are grouped 
according to competency and each group rated correspond- 
ingly, any particular standard rate will either be so low as 
to be of little appreciable support to the most efficient men, 
or so high as to exclude a number of the least efficient from 
employment at the union rate. 



1 6 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

There is obviously an inherent difficulty in establishing 
standard rates for workers who are not standardized. Oc- 
casionally unions have sought for a solution in the direction 
of standardizing the workers by dividing them into groups 
according to competency. But the usual basis of grouping 
is the kind of work done, not the efficiency with which it is 
done. An appreciable tendency toward standardization of 
men engaged in the same kind of work or subject to the 
same minimum, at least toward the elimination of those below 
a somewhat variable level of capacity, is fostered in many 
unions by the requirements as to competency insisted on for 
admission to membership. In the great majority of cases, 
however, the same rate applies to workers of appreciably 
differing capacities, and the establishment of the standard 
leaves some members of more than average efficiency under 
the necessity of individual contracting to secure wages 
higher than their less efficient fellow members. The influ- 
ence of the various phases of union policy connected with 
the maintenance of minimum time rates on the opportunities 
of the speedier or more highly skilled workmen to obtain 
more than the union rate, and the extent to which they 
actually do obtain more, are among the most significant 
questions connected with union wage policies — and the most 
difficult of exact answer. The policies and experiences of 
representative unions in the use of the standard time rate, 
considered from this point of view, are presented in Chap- 
ter II. 

The distinguishing mark of a standard rate, that is to 
say, the attribute which makes a union rate standard, is 
uniformity of application, or the obligation to observe such 
a rate in all the shops or localities for which it is established. 
A very important point with regard to any given rate there- 
fore is the industrial or territorial extent over which it is 
standard. Some rates are standard only for single shops, 
others for localities, others for districts or sections embrac- 
ing many localities, and some in all shops or plants in the 
entire union jurisdiction. These several areas of applica- 



Introduction I J 

tion and the determining reasons for each will be taken up 
in turn in Chapter III. 

The union preferences and policies in the matter of the 
form of the standard rate and the reasons which account for 
these will be considered in Chapter IV. The question of 
the form of the rate reduces itself in practice to a choice 
between the time rate and the piece rate, and this choice is 
obviously determined by the union's preference for the time 
method of payment or for the piece method. The decision 
between the two forms of rate is complicated in some trades 
by the fact that employers often prefer to follow the very 
method to which the unions object. The union attitude is 
in most cases not merely one of preference for one form 
but of deep hostility to the other. This makes the question 
of the form of the rate a not unimportant source of indus- 
trial disputes. 



CHAPTER I 



THE PIECE SCALE 



The function of the piece scale, as pointed out in the In- 
troduction, is to provide clearly a distinct rate for each 
variety of product and for each substantially different set 
of circumstances surrounding production, in so far as these 
require distinction in payment and can be anticipated. In 
existing piece-working trades there are three important ele- 
ments which directly affect the rate of remuneration and 
which, therefore, must be considered in standardizing piece 
wages. These are: (i) the physical characteristics of the 
product itself, (2) the conditions under which it is pro- 
duced, (3) the operations or processes which are assumed 
to be included in the task of the worker who receives the 
rate. A satisfactory piece scale must in most trades take 
account of all three of these sources of difference. 

The commonest occasion for rate differentiation is that 
resulting from differences in the product itself, — dimen- 
sions, pattern, style, or the materials from which it is made. 
These differences are of such conspicuous importance in 
compelling differentiation in rates that it might seem that 
the task of scale formulation consists practically in providing 
for them. But it is also essential that what is to be done 
by the worker to secure the rate, that is to say, the precise 
activities which must be performed by him or by a helper 
or helpers paid by him, be defined in the scale, wherever this 
is not so clearly understood as to obviate need of definition. 
If there be non-uniformity as to the performance of supple- 
mentary or subsidiary operations by the piece worker, there 
is variation in the real rate of payment, and, presumably, 
a reduction in some cases from the rate intended. Defini- 
tion is often necessary, not only to prevent non-uniformity 
in the rate of remuneration, but to put a stop to disputes 

18 



The Piece Scale 19 

as to what constitutes the worker's standard task. Those 
differences in the physical conditions of production which 
are normal and calculable present no special difficulty in 
standardizing wages. The task of providing rates to meet 
them is closely akin to that of rating familiar variations in 
the form of the product itself, and will be considered with 
the latter in the present discussion. But it is necessary in 
many trades, in order to safeguard the worker's general rate 
of remuneration, and to prevent wage disputes, to make 
provision in the regular scale for the payment to be made 
when conditions are less favorable than is normal, as for 
instance, when the materials furnished are defective. It is 
important, too, that the scale shall clearly indicate exactly 
when these special provisions are to apply. 

These three features of piece-scale construction (1) rate 
differentiation to correspond with differentiation in the 
product itself or in the conditions under which it is normally 
made, (2) definition of what is to be done by the worker to 
secure the rate, and (3) provision for payment when condi- 
tions are abnormally difficult for attaining output, as they 
are found in existing piece-working systems, will be con- 
sidered in turn. 

I 

Differentiation of the Rate 

First, as to differentiation in rates to correspond with 
differences in the product itself or in the conditions under 
which it is normally made. The character and number of 
these differences vary, of course, from trade to trade, and 
the problems presented are in their details peculiar to each 
trade. For the piece-working trades as a whole, however, 
they may be grouped under several heads according to the 
lines of differentiation. The most important of these is in 
(a) the form of product, including under this head varia- 
tions in size or dimensions, in pattern or shape, and in 
finish. Next in order comes (b) differentiation in the ma- 
terials. Somewhat similar is (c) the prevalence of different 



20 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

physical conditions which affect the difficulty of attaining 
output. The different materials are assumed to be in nor- 
mally good shape for working and the physical conditions 
sufficiently familiar to be given piece rates. Often several, 
and sometimes all, of these bases of differentiation are 
found together in the same trade, each demanding consid- 
eration in the determination of the rate for a given unit of 
product. Differences in pattern and in materials are in par- 
ticular frequently found crossing each other. 

The task of making and enforcing a list of clearly appli- 
cable standard rates to correspond with these differences 
as they appear in a particular trade involves no little diffi- 
culty. In many of the piece-working trades it demands a 
considerable part of the time of the union officials and is 
even responsible for the existence of special agencies in the 
union frame of government. For the construction of a 
satisfactory piece scale it is necessary not only to enumerate 
and specify the different varieties of product to be rated, 
and the different sets of physical conditions, where these 
have to be taken into account, but also to secure agreement 
as to how the rates shall vary to compensate the comparative 
skill and effort required for the production of a unit in each 
different case. In a trade in which there is wide variety in 
the forms of the product this is a serious task. 1 

The necessity of securing agreement as to the differentia- 
tion which is to be made in the rate schedule to meet differ- 
ences in the form of the product is the heart of the problem. 
The difficulty lies not so much in establishing the fact that 
a given variety of product turned out under given circum- 

1 It is true, to be sure, that no piece-working trade has to face the 
task of constructing a scale outright. Price lists are dealt with as 
already " going." Even a union which makes a list for the first time 
by collective bargaining has a tentative basis in the prices prevailing 
before collective bargaining was begun. The normal concern of the 
union with the piece scale is that of interpretation, revision, and 
amendment. But the difficulties which would be encountered in 
the original construction of a scale are met^ though probably not to 
the same extent, in keeping the scale in satisfactory running order. 
The same questions which would arise in constructing a new price 
list have to be answered in the pricing of new work and in the con- 
sideration of requests for the revision of particular items. 



The Piece Scale 21 

stances calls for more skill or exertion per unit than another, 
as in establishing the degree of difference. This difficulty 
goes back to the practical impossibility of obtaining an exact 
measure of the labor demanded for turning out units of 
product of different kinds, or of the same kind under dif- 
ferent conditions. At times other factors than comparative 
difficulty of production, as for instance, the price conditions 
obtaining for certain varieties are admitted in fixing rates, 
but the ruling consideration is nearly always comparative 
difficulty. 1 

The measure of comparative difficulty used in practically 
all piece-working trades is the time that should be required 
by a worker of an assumed grade of skill to produce a unit 
of the product under certain conditions which may be 
regarded as normal. The grade of skill taken is usually that 
assumed to be the average in the trade. 2 It is generally 
intended that each rate should give workers of equal speed 
approximately the same return for the same length of time 
worked on any of the pieces listed. At least the rates on 
the various pieces on which a worker may normally expect 
to be engaged in the course of a week or less should yield 
an assumed return for the period. 3 The problem of rate 

1 Instances of rate differentiation not based entirely on differences 
in comparative difficulty are given below; see pp. 55^58. 

2 Comparative time required is an indication of comparative diffi- 
culty only when special skill is not necessary for doing all or any part 
of the work; it is a measure only when skill is indicated by speed in 
doing the same kind of work rather than by ability to do kinds not 
performed by the ordinary workman. The measure of comparative 
time can be applied to determine how the rates for the specially 
difficult varieties of work should stand in relation to each other, but 
not to determine the relation of these to the rates for the ordinary 
varieties. The differential between ordinary and special varieties of 
work must be great enough, of course, in the long run to draw to 
the special work the proportion of men needed for it. Where there 
are such divisions of the trade the extent of the differential in 
weekly earnings accorded the higher division is usually of long 
standing. In practically all of the larger piece-working trades, 
however, every worker is assumed to be able to turn out any work 
on the list, and comparative time is therefore followed throughout 
as a measure of comparative difficulty. 

3 In trades in which a list has been long established this assumed 
average return is that given by those rates in the list which are 
already accepted without question. In some of the more poorly or- 
ganized trades in which rates have not the same permanence it is 
a round sum per week. 



22 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

differentiation is reduced in practice, therefore, to a deter- 
mination of the time required for the production of a unit 
of each of the various kinds of product under each differ- 
ent set of conditions. 

The comparative time actually required by workers of 
average skill to turn out different units of product in the 
several factories or plants in which the same standard rates 
are to be binding is, of course, extremely difficult, if not 
impossible, of exact determination. It can hardly be estab- 
lished as a constant for the period for which the scale is 
signed even in a single factory or plant. In practice, there- 
fore, it is generally the estimated comparative time that is 
applied as the rate determinant. Exactness is not aimed 
at, but it is intended that an approximation shall be reached 
which can be assumed to be fair when particular pieces are 
averaged. The rates arrived at in this way are not always 
satisfactory, and where the use of this determinant appar- 
ently fails to give rates in approximate correspondence with 
difficulty of production there is objection on the part of 
the workers to the piece system as it exists in the trade. 
However, in many piece-working trades time required is 
felt on the whole to be a practical guide in rate differentia- 
tion, and in these trades both contracting parties are content 
to accept it and trust to periodic revision to prevent the 
•continuance of any discrepancies that may find their way 
into the list and work injustice to individual employees or 
employers. 

The necessity of enumerating clearly the varieties of 
product and conditions which have been rated, to the extent 
necessary to prevent misunderstandings, is not an unim- 
portant part of the task of piece-scale construction, though 
not 'the major part. In those trades in which one scale 
covers several shops or localities, real difficulty has often 
been experienced in the attempt to make clear beyond the 
chance of dispute and throughout the territory for which 
the scale is binding, the rates which are intended to be paid 
in every case covered in the list. In a number of trades 



The Piece Scale 23 

the necessity of determining prices in local dispute and of 
clarifying the price list to avoid further misunderstandings 
of the same character has contributed considerably to the 
work involved in operating the scale. 

Form of the product. — As differences in the form of the 
product — dimensions, pattern, or finish — are by far the most 
common of those variations in the product or in the condi- 
tions under which it is turned out which compel rate differ- 
entiation, it is under this head that most of the difficulties 
in standardizing the price lists are to be found. 1 It is in 
adjusting rates to meet differences of this kind that the 
measure of comparative time required must oftenest be 
called into service, and it is in the application of these par- 
ticular rates that most of the questions as to the rate in- 
tended to be paid are raised. 

It is not merely the relative number of distinct sizes or 
patterns to be covered by a single scale which determines 
the degree of difficulty in maintaining a standard price list. 
The extent to which the variations follow a well understood 
gradation in physical measurements or are reducible to 
easily ascertained variation in the number of constituent 
items, is an important factor. If the distinct forms can be 
identified by reference to measures of weight or length, or 
to other units of computation well known to the trade, the 
danger of misunderstanding in interpreting the lists is 
eliminated or greatly reduced. The particular variety of' 
product for which a given rate is to be paid can in such 
cases be clearly indicated, and questions as to where par- 
ticular pieces belong in the rate classification can be decided 
by the application of physical measures or by the use of 
formulas of which the factors are capable of exact determi- 

1 There are a few piece-rate systems which do not have to take 
account of differences in pattern or style. The most important of 
these are the piece-payment systems of the coal miners, the iron 
puddlers or boilers, and the longshoremen. Payment in the first two 
trades is per ton, and among the longshoremen it i^ per ton or in 
terms of a unit of cubic or linear measurement. The variations in 
rates are naturally for differences in the materials worked or 
handled, or in the conditions affecting the difficulty of mining, 
puddling, or loading and unloading. 



24 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

nation. An orderly variation also — even if it does not allow 
an all-inclusive classification to be made — simplifies the 
matter of rate differentiation when new work is to be priced, 
or when revision is requested of particular prices in the 
list. If the product follows a well understood order of 
differentiation, the relation between physical measurement 
and difficulty of production at different stages in the grada- 
tion is likely to be well established, and the fixing of the 
prices in question is facilitated by reference to existing 
types of work and the respective prices paid. 

Physical standards of this kind are available and are used 
to a considerable extent as guides in price setting in the 
textile trades, more particularly in spinning and weaving. 
In cotton mule spinning, for instance, the rates are made 
to vary with the " number " of the yarn spun. The " num- 
ber" is the number of skeins (of 840 yards each) in a 
pound of the yarn. The mule spinners' price lists set forth 
the price to be paid per 100 skeins for the numbers from 
9 to 130, the numbers ordinarily paid for under the piece 
system, and provide that " for fractional parts of numbers 
if less than half a number the lower price will be paid; 
when over half a number the price of the next higher num- 
ber will be paid." 1 The price for any number of yarn from 
9 to 130, therefore, is clearly determined. 

The number of the yarn is accepted in the trade as a 
fair index of the comparative time required to spin a given 
length or weight of yarn. In the first place, the number 
of turns of twist per inch to be put into the yarn is a fixed 
multiple of the number of the yarn being spun. Secondly, 
■the number of the yarn is directly related to the time lost 
in " doffing," that is, in removing the " cops " of spun yarn 
and putting empty reels in place. On the lower numbers the 
frequency of such stops is appreciably greater than when 
finer yarn is being spun. The price per 100 hanks or skeins 
runs up steadily from number 36, and is increased for the 

1 Price-List for Mule Spinning on and after April 10, 1908, New 
Bedford, Mass. 



The Piece Scale 25 

numbers below 36 with each block of several numbers. The 
higher prices of the numbers below 36 are due to the in- 
creased stoppings for doffing, which more than offset the 
greater speed in actual spinning of the coarser yarn. 1 

Losses from full output, except for cleaning and for 
minor accidents which occur independently of the spinner's 
efficiency, are assumed to vary with the care and skill exer- 
cised by the spinner. Thus the output which may be 
expected if the spinner suffers no preventable losses, or 
none from accident, varies with the number, and may, 
therefore, be closely calculated in advance. Consequently 
any variation in rates according to variations in this calcu- 
lated output at each number will give earnings very closely 
in correspondence with comparative efficiency, if other con- 
ditions affecting production, such as the character and con- 
dition of the machines and of the cotton being spun are 
assumed to be standard. The estimated actual output which 
is taken as a basis in setting rates designed to give a certain 
average weekly wage is reckoned by subtracting from the 
calculated output under perfect operation a given percent- 
age to allow for the output the average spinner is expected 
to lose because of breaks and for minor accidents. 2 The 
national secretary of the Cotton Mule Spinners states that 
the New Bedford price list was arrived at "by trying to 
make the wages equal by fixing a price according to the 
product of the mules on the varying numbers." 

In the weaving of woollen and cotton goods, similar 
factors are available for determining in advance the time 
required for the production of given lengths of the vari- 
ous patterns. The determinants here are the number of 
"weft" threads thrown across the warp per inch, known 
as the number of " picks per inch," and the number of times 
the shuttle crosses the warp per minute, termed the number 
of "picks per minute." The number of picks per minute 
divided by the picks per inch gives the length of fabric in 

1 See Appendix A for method of calculating the standard output 
of cotton mule spinners. 

2 See Appendix A. 



26 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

inches woven per minute. For plain weaving, at least for 
goods of the same width, the speed of the looms, that is, 
the number of picks per minute, is usually standard for a 
given mill. " Fancy " fabrics or greater widths can not be 
woven at the same rate of speed, so that the picks per 
minute are less for these than for plain goods. As in mule 
spinning, the percentage of continuous operation depends 
partly on the materials used and partly on the skill and care 
exercised by the operators. Within wide limits no attention 
is paid to variations in the yarn numbers; but for such 
items as extra coarse filling, which necessitates more fre- 
quent stoppings to replace the exhausted shuttle bobbins, 
allowance is made in the expected output. For the same 
kind of weaving, as for instance the weaving of plain cloth, 
if the yarns used are of proper strength, the looms in good 
running order, the speed of the looms the same, the width 
of the cloth standard, and the numbers of the warp and 
filling within given limits, the output, that is, the picks per 
inch by inches woven, will vary with the skill and care ex- 
ercised by the operators. 

If the picks per minute be taken as uniform and other 
conditions are standard the price per pick per inch serves 
as a basis for adjusting wages to difficulty of production. 
It has been customary in New England to set prices for 
weaving woollens and worsted in terms of " mills per pick," 
that is, mills per pick per inch. At one time there was a 
generally recognized price of two mills per pick for plain 
weaving. The prices per pick for other classes of weaving 
were arrived at by additions to the price for plain work in 
the case of complicated weaving, which requires more skill 
or greater carefulness to avoid loss of time through breaks, 
or more time to make the proper adjustments of shuttles. 1 

1 More than the price for plain weaving is usually paid when more 
than one shuttle is used (in some mills for more than two), or more 
than a given number of " harnesses "^ (ten or twelve). Additional 
shuttles mean more colors in the filling to be watched and more 
care needed in changing the shuttles. More harnesses than the 
weaver commonly uses means greater difficulty in finding broken 
threads in the warp and in inserting these in their proper " headles " 
when more than one are broken. More is paid sometimes, too, for 



The Piece Scale 27 

The standard price per pick has broken down in recent 
years. The weavers' unions in the woollen trade, though 
stronger than in the cotton trade, have not as a rule been 
able to maintain a system of standard prices per pick. 
Weavers now generally run two looms on plain work and 
the price per pick for two-loom weaving is but slightly 
over half that for single-loom weaving, which varies from 
one and one-half to two mills per pick, with the average 
probably closer to the lower figure. The system of setting 
a price per yard per pick per inch is still in common use; 
but the differentials to be added for departures from plain 
weaving are far from standardized. 

The cotton weavers' unions of New England do not 
maintain a system of prices based on the picks per inch 
even for plain cloth, though the necessary factors are pres- 
ent, and such systems are maintained by joint agreement 
in Lancashire. 1 The cotton weavers' local unions are not 
strong enough to establish throughout New England a 
standard basic rate for plain cloth, nor have they secured 
local agreements for the settlement of prices by this method 
of calculation from a basic price per pick. Weaving prices 
are set as a rule by the employers, at so much per cut of 
50 yards. The action of the unions in wage matters is 
usually confined to enforcing percentage advances or to pre- 
venting percentage reductions from the existing prices; 
individual prices per cut are not made the subject of union 
bargaining as a rule. 2 

extra close warp, indicated by a high " reed number." The reed 
number gives the number of warp ends per inch. 

1 See Report on Standard Piece Rates of Wages and Sliding 
Scales in the United Kingdom, 1900, p. xvii. 

2 The employers, however, generally arrive at the prices per cut 
through a calculation, from the picks per minute and picks per inch, 
of the number of yards of the particular pattern that should be 
turned out in a week. For common looms on plain cloth ten per 
cent, is usually deducted for stopping. For automatic looms there 
is no deduction. This estimated weekly product per loom is mul- 
tiplied by the number of looms the average weaver is expected to 
run and a price per cut is set which at this output will give the 
intended average weekly earnings. The Fall River price for 
" prints," plain cotton cloth, 28 inches wide, of 64 picks and 64 reed 
■("64 X 64"), which is usually about 18 cents per cut of 50 yards, 
28 inches wide, is taken as a guide by most manufacturers. 



28 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

The price list of the Elastic Goring Weavers also illus- 
trates a rate differentiation based on calculable variants. 
The price per yard for webs of the same material varies 
with the number of picks and dents per inch, and with the 
leash number. The more common combinations are listed 
in tables, the numbers of the leash, dent, and pick being 
given in parallel columns, and provision made in foot notes 
for the number of cents extra per yard for extra items. 1 
The Lace Operatives' price list for weaving is similarly 
adjusted to variants of the same general character. 2 

There are several other instances of price lists based on 
dimensions, but less automatically so than in the textile 
trades. Nearest to exactness among these is the price list 
of the sheet and tin division of the Amalgamated Associa- 
tion of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers, for rolling iron and 
steel billets into sheets of the required thinness. The index 
of thinness is the gauge number; each gauge number indi- 
cates the weight per square foot, and the gauge numbers 
rise as the weight and the thickness of the sheet decrease. 3 
The price is given per ton for each of the various numbers 
in the list. As the thinner the sheets the longer the time, 
other things being equal, required to reduce a ton of billets 
to the specified gauge number, the price per ton for sheets 
of the same width rises with the gauge number. It does 
not, however, rise proportionately, as the difficulty does not 
increase proportionately. 

In the printing branch of the pottery trade also the union 
prices follow calculable variants. These are the number 
of " sprigs " contained on the copper or steel plates used in 
printing and the number of separate prints necessary to put 
the pattern on the ware. 4 

1 Constitution and Rules and Price List of the Elastic Goring 
Weavers' Amalgamated Association, 1907. 

2 Revised List of Prices, as amended and agreed to by the Man- 
ufacturers and the Chartered Society of Amalgamated Lace Oper- 
atives, June, 1907. 

8 Western Scale of Prices Governing Wages in Rolling Mills, for 
the year ending June 30, 1909. 

4 The following clause in the scale sets forth the method of apply- 
ing the scale for dinner sets. " The standard 100-piece dinner set 



The Piece Scale 29 

The Window Glass Workers' schedule of rates is also 
based largely on physical measurements capable of exact 
determination. The price per "box" of 100 square feet 
of glass varies with the size of the sheets, the " strength " 
(that is, thickness) and the quality of the glass. 1 Very 
recently a " triple " strength has been added to " single " 
and " double," 2 and a distinction in quality re-introduced. 3 
The variations in the square inches of surface and in the 
thickness of the sheets figure most prominently in the scale 
and there is little difficulty in determining these. Some 
years ago there was a controversy in applying the list, but 
this was not due to any difficulty in measuring the product. 
The question turned upon the rate to be paid for cutting 
" fractional " glass, that is, sheets of which one or both 
dimensions measured a fractional number of inches, such 
as 8 J inches by 21. Some employers contended that this 
should be cut at the same price as whole inches, and though 
the cutters contended that it was more difficult work and 
called for a higher rate, for a time a higher rate was not 
conceded. Finally fractional glass was specifically given 
a higher price in the scale and this differentiation enforced 
in the trade. 4 

is to be used for computing price per dozen, to be figured as follows : 
Divide the number of sprigs on dinner set by number of sprigs used 
from copper plate which gives number of prints to do one set; 
then multiply by price per unit as given in above scale which gives 
you the price of printing 100-piece set, which divided by Sh dozen 
gives you the price per dozen of the pattern, which price is to be 
paid for dinner sets or open stock, straight count, or twelve pieces 
to the dozen" (Wage Scale and Agreements between the U. S. 
Potters' Association and the National Brotherhood of Operative 
Potters, adopted October 1, 1905). 

1 National Window Glass Workers' National Flat Scale, 1009. 

2 Proceedings of the National Window Glass Workers of America, 
1907, p. 99. Triple strength is rated at 150 per cent, the rate for 
double, and double is a little less than twice the rate for single 
strength (National Flat Scale, in effect to June 11, 1909). 

3 There were four " qualities " in the 1884-5 scale. The scales for 
several years before 1908-9 provided for but one quality. In the 
1908-9 scale provision was made for an additional 5 per cent, for 
single strength and 10 per cent, for double strength of A. and A.A. 
quality. 

4 Proceedings, 1889, pp. 44-5; Minutes of February 6, 1891 ; Scale, 
1892-3; Constitution, 1908, Rules, VII, sec. 52; Scale, in effect to 
June 11, 1909. 



30 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

The Typographical Union for many years maintained a 
system of piece payment based on a scheme of physical 
measurement of product, which was easy of application but 
admittedly failed to provide payment in exact proportion 
to comparative difficulty. Apparently the original intention 
in the trade was that the matter set up by the compositors 
should be paid for in proportion to the number of pieces 
of type set. As counting was impracticable a unit of meas- 
urement was adopted which it was assumed varied directly 
with the number of pieces set. But long before the piece 
system was abandoned in the trade it was recognized that 
the unit of measurement did not measure accurately or 
unvaryingly the number of pieces set. Yet the change to 
time payment did not come from dissatisfaction with the 
scheme of piece payment in vogue, but in consequence of 
the introduction of the type-setting machine. 

Composition was paid for at a given price per thousand 
" ems." 1 The " em " is a unit of surface measurement of 
equal length and width. The "depth," or length up and 
down the page, of all pieces of type in each " font " is the 
same, and the em is the square of the depth. It is, there- 
fore, of fixed dimensions for each font of type. The num- 
ber of ems is not the same as the number of pieces set, for 
though the depth of all pieces of type in the same font is 
the same the widths are not. The widths of the bodies vary 
with the widths of the letters cast on them and, except for 
the letter m, are less than the depth. It was assumed, and 
properly, that the widths of the letters used by each com- 
positor would in the long run average approximately the 
same. If fonts of type exactly alike were used, therefore, 
the number of ems would vary in the same proportion as 
the number of pieces in setting "straight" matter. 

The defect of the em as a unit of measurement arose 
from the fact that the relation of the width of all the pieces 

1 This discussion of the system of payment in the printing trade 
is based upon pp. 108-131 of " The Printers ; A Study in American 
Trade Unionism," by George E. Barnett in American Economic 
Association Quarterly, October, 1909. 



The Piece Scale 31 

in the alphabet taken together to their depth was not the 
same in all fonts of type of the same size. Some fonts of 
the same size were " leaner " than others, that is, the letters 
were narrower in proportion to their width and so num- 
bered less ems in the combined widths of the letters than 
normal type of that size. A compositor would therefore 
have to set more pieces for a given number of ems than 
he would if using type of a font in which the aggregate 
width of the alphabet was greater. 1 Attempts were made 
by the local unions to set standards of width for the ordi- 
nary rate and to secure higher rates than the standard for 
"leaner" fonts; but no really satisfactory adjustment was 
reached in this way. The national union also gave attention 
to the question and proposals for the introduction of other 
units of measurement were considered by the union, the 
publishers, and the type founders. 

Even more important was the fact that the em utterly 
failed as a measure of difficulty with " fat " matter. The 
term " fat " in the printing trade is applied to matter con- 
taining more open space and consequently less pieces of 
type to the square inch, than " straight " matter. The price 
per em was a lump price for all matter and " fat " matter 
was paid for at the same price as " straight " matter. " A 
partially blank page thus gave the compositor the same re- 
turn as a full one, although it involved much less trouble. 
So the head and foot lines of a book, as well as any ' dis- 
play ' matter which might occur, such as the title, half-title, 
and dedication pages were paid for as if the space were 
filled with straight matter." 2 The " fat " also included dis- 

1 In 1837 " the Columbia Society of Washington appointed a com- 
mittee to investigate the range of type in the several offices. It was 
found that the widths of all the lower case, i. e., small letters of the 
alphabet, taken together measured in different fonts from 11$ to 
13 times the depth of the type, or, as the committee put it, ni to 13 
ems. A compositor working from the ' leanest ' font had, therefore, 
to set about 15 per cent, more pieces of type than from the ' fattest ' 
in order to have as many ems." " In 1879 Mr. Samuel Rastall, in a 
comparison between five offices in Chicago, showed that, with the 
same labor with which a compositor setting minion type of standard 
width could earn $18.63 in one office, he could earn $21.65 in another 
office where the font was 'fatter'" (Barnett, pp. 126, 128). 

2 Barnett, p. 116. 



32 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

play advertisements and "cuts" in newspapers, and 
throughout stood in no given or unvarying proportion to 
the amount of straight matter in any particular job. The 
local unions adopted many interesting regulations to pre- 
vent the employers " culling the fat " and having it set by 
time workers. The union's justification therefor was that 
they assumed the " fat " to be included when the price per 
thousand ems was set. In some cases the right to the " fat " 
was given up for a specified increase in rates. Rules were 
also enforced for the equitable distribution of the " fat " 
among the compositors in the shop. 

There are other cases of rate differentiation based on 
measurable physical units; but the above sufficiently illus- 
trate in completeness and simplicity the application of such 
measures. In the other cases the differences in physical 
measurements play only a minor part in the whole scheme 
of differentiation, or are much more irregular than in the 
lists described. The Cigar Makers' lists, for instance, call 
for prices varying with the number of quarter inches in 
length, but the prices vary also with important differences 
in shape and materials. 1 The rates for rolling on "finish- 
ing mills " in the scales of the Iron, Steel and Tin Workers 
vary with the width of the rolls and with the sizes of the 
rolled iron, but also with the shapes. The large number of 
different shapes makes the price schedule a descriptive list 
of patterns rather than a list following differences in meas- 
urements like that for sheet mills described above. 2 

Under the schemes of rate differentiation described above, 
the determination of the rate class to which given units 
belong is a matter of physical measurement or computation 

1 This practice is common now ; but it is interesting to note that a 
committee appointed by the Baltimore Cigar Makers to f rame_ a bill 
of prices in 1879 reported that " from past experience " it did not 
deem it practicable to draw up a bill " according to inches of cigars." 
Such differentiation, however, seems to have been desired by the 
workers at the time (MS. Minutes of Baltimore Cigar Makers, 
November 14, 1879). 

2 Western Scale of Prices, 190&-9. 



The Piece Scale 33 

from recognized factors. The application of the list is thus 
comparatively an easy matter. Moreover the presence in 
all new and special work of variants already recognized 
makes the pricing of such work relatively easy. Reliance 
upon simple physical determinants is, however, on the 
decline. The tendency in pricing work is toward direct 
resort to separate estimate of the comparative time required 
in each particular case, and to detailed description of pat- 
terns. This tendency is due to the increasing diversifica- 
tion in patterns which makes the application of simple de- 
terminants inadequate. 

The characteristic feature of the systems of piece pay- 
ment next to be described is that each different kind of 
product must therein be separately priced without the pos- 
sibility of applying to any serviceable extent recognized 
physical measurements of difficulty. The observance of the 
rate for each kind of product, after it has been entered in 
the list, is secured by adequate description. The differences 
between the two systems may be brought out more clearly 
by considering the case of the Granite Cutters, a union in 
which piece work prevailed in large part until about 1895. 1 
In this union the piece rates were based partly on physical 
measurements and partly on the identification of designs. 
The physical measures were applied without much difficulty, 
whereas the identification system could be used only with 
friction and lack of uniformity. 

The price for cutting granite was entered in the scales at 
a given sum per cubic foot, sometimes per " linear " foot. 
This price varied — to confine the illustration to granite used 
for building purposes — with the architectural design or 
pattern of the stone, with the degree of fineness in execution 
required, and with the " hardness " or " softness " of the 
stone.- This last difference was defined usually in terms 
of the locality in which the granite was quarried and gave 

1 See below, p. 193. 

2 For example, Quincy Bill of Prices, 1886; Bill of Prices issued by 
the National Union (about 1888) ; Bill for Westerly, R. I., 1889; Bill 
for New York, 1890; Bill for Denver, 1889. 

3 



34 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

no appreciable difficulty in application. Nor was the kind 
of finish a cause of much dispute in price determination. 
The various grades of fineness were well known and passed 
as numbers of "points"; they were also distinguishable 
approximately by the tools used, such as " pean hammered," 
"bush hammered," and "fine bush hammered." Disputes 
over finish were rather as to whether the required finish had 
been given than over the rate to be paid for a given finish. 
Nearly all the serious difficulties in the application of the 
price lists grew out of differences in the design or pattern 
of the stone. The scales provided distinct rates per foot 
for different patterns, as for example, " bases," " friezes," 
"moldings," and number of "members." There were 
many disagreements as to how the particular pattern of 
stone should be classified. 1 As a granite cutter often worked 
several days on one stone, sometimes even several weeks, 
a difference in the computation basis for one stone made a 
serious difference in wages. These difficulties were never 
satisfactorily overcome. Diagrams were inserted in many 
scales to indicate the patterns to which the rates were to 
apply, and rules were laid down to be followed in computing 
prices. A special form was adopted by the national union 
to be followed by the local branches in drawing up scales. 2 
It also became common for local unions to appoint com- 
mittees of union men to " figure " prices with the employers 
for the individual workmen when these disagreed. 3 But 
this did not secure the smooth working of the system. The 
men were often timid about disputing the employer's or 
foreman's figures, and many refused to serve on committees 
for "figuring" prices for fear of being "victimized." It 
was also found impossible to frame scales that would include 

1 See for example, Granite Cutters' Journal, January, 1877; May, 
1883; October, 1886; January, February, December, 1887; January, 
1888. 

2 Constitution, 1888, Art. XII, sec. 22 ; Bill of Prices issued by the 
National Union ; also bills cited above for Quincy, Westerly, Denver, 
and New York; Bill of Prices for Concord, N. H., 1892; Bill of 
Prices for Richmond, Va., in effect May 1, 1900; Bill of Prices for 
Quincy, 1905-8. 

3 Granite Cutters' Journal, August, 1882; January, 1888. 



The Piece Scale 35 

all work, and "stones not covered in the bill" often had 
to be made the subject of special bargains. The making of 
these special bargains was a fruitful source of dispute and 
the prices thus arrived at were often regarded by the men 
as reductions forced by the employer from the intended 
scale basis. 1 The unsatisfactory experience of both sides 
in the application of piece bills was an important reason 
for finally doing away with piece work in the trade. 

There are several important predominantly piece- working 
unions in which rate differentiation does not follow phys- 
ically measurable differences in product, or variations in 
pattern according to the number of well-recognized and 
easily ascertainable items present. Some of the best known 
piece-working unions work under scales which attempt to 
cover, by descriptive enumeration, every type or pattern for 
which a distinct rate is to be paid. In this group of unions 
are found the Glass Bottle Blowers' Association, the Amer- 
ican Flint Glass Workers' Union, the Brotherhood of Oper- 
ative Potters, the shirt and overall workers in the United 
Garment Workers, the Tailors, and the stove molders in 
the Molders' Union. All of these except the stove molders 
have national uniform lists. 2 

The price lists of the Glass Bottle Blowers, the Flint 
Glass Workers, and the Potters are by far the longest 
national lists maintained by American trade unions. It is 
the purpose of these unions to enumerate in the respective 
schedules the distinct patterns of ware already priced, and 
to use them as guides in the pricing of new or special pat- 
terns which appear in the intervals between scale revision. 
The normal types are entered in long descriptive lists, and 
provision is made in footnotes, particularly in the Bottle 

1 Granite Cutters' Journal, February, April, 1886 ; May, 1887. 

2 The national list of the shirt and overall workers is a minimum 
list only. The Tailors' national list is one which establishes no 
prices but is to be followed as to form in the framing of local price 
bills. The stove molders' lists are single shop lists but these are 
bound together in close district systems and in a loose national 
system. 



36 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

Blowers' and in the Potters' scales, for minor variations in 
finish, lettering and weights, and for specific differences in 
pattern, such as extra wide mouths, or additional " handles," 
" legs," or " feet." This practice reduces the size of the 
body of the list, which is confined to the enumeration of 
the more fundamental differences in styles. 

The three price lists of the Glass Bottle Blowers' Asso- 
ciation make up the longest price list published by any 
American trade union. 1 Each distinct type of bottle is 
priced separately by the method of estimate and comparison 
and entered by name in the list. The list enumerates, how- 
ever, only a part of the bottles which are actually made 
under it and have been priced by the union and employers. 
Bottles which are of the same type as those already named 
in the list and which are believed to deserve the same rate 
are not separately entered except at the request of either 
party. 2 New bottles are priced in the locality in which they 
first appear, by comparison with those already in the list, 
and these locally established prices are used until ratified 
or changed by the national joint wage committee. 3 

For the revision of the list and for the rating of ware the 
price of which is in dispute, and for other wage matters, 
joint wage committees meet twice each year. The first 

1 The union publishes its list in three separate books, one for hand- 
blown ware from tanks and open pots, which is the main list, one 
for hand-blown ware from covered pots, and one for machine-blown 
and pressed ware. The covered-pot list was added after the union 
took over the prescription bottle blowers from the Flint Glass Work- 
ers in 1901. The machine list was also added in 1901 (Proceedings 
of the Glass Bottle Blowers, 1901, pp. 17, 491). About one-sixth of 
the members are now working on machines. The union also has a 
small price list for its stopper-making and stopper-grinding branches, 
but these affect a very small number of members. This association 
has recently taken in a few caster place workers, a branch of the 
trade formerly controlled entirely by the Flint Glass Workers, and 
it adopts in convention a price list for them also. 

2 Wage Scale and Working Rules adopted by the G.B.B.A. and 
the National Glass Vial and Bottle Manufacturers' Association, Blast 
of 1908-9, Rules and Regulations, sec. 33 ; Wage Scale adopted by 
the G.B.B.A. and the Flint Prescription Manufacturers' Association, 
applying to covered pots only, Blast of 1908-9, Rules and Regu- 
lations, sec. 34. 

3 Wage Scale and Working Rules 1908-9, sec. 42 ; Wage Scale and 
Working Rules, applying to covered pots only, 1908-9, sec. 43. 



The Piece Scale 37 

meeting, known as the "preliminary conference," is held 
several weeks before the convention of the union, to con- 
sider changes in or additions to prices or working rules sug- 
gested by either side. 1 The union committee reports the 
results of its preliminary conference to the convention, and 
after the convention the union conferees meet the manu- 
facturers' committee in the final conference to take up mat- 
ters which were not agreed upon in the preliminary con- 
ference or in which the action of the first conference was 
not ratified by both associations. The union view is that 
the list may not be changed except by mutual agreement. 2 
No more elaborate procedure for keeping a price list in 
working order is maintained in any trade. The officers of 
the union say that the preliminary conference is a neces- 
sity if prices are to be made by the conference method, and 
think that the conference method is vital to the maintenance 
of a satisfactory piece-price system. 3 

The Flint Glass Workers' scale problems are very much- 
like those of the Bottle Blowers, and prices are fixed by the 

1 No changes or additions may be made at the final conference 
which have not been considered at the preliminary conference. Each 
side must notify the other in advance of the preliminary conference 
of the changes or additions it desires (Proceedings, 1897, pp. 36, 101 ; 
Minutes of Final Machine Conference, July, 1907; Wage Scale and 
Working Rules, 1908-9, sees. 55-57 ; W^age Scale and Working Rules, 
applying to covered pots only, sees. 55-57). 

a The final conference has not always resulted in the signing of 
the scale. In 1905 the scale was not signed and the union decided 
to enforce the 1004-5 scale with the changes agreed upon before the 
adjournment of the conference. The same thing was done in 1906 
for 1906-7 (Proceedings, 1906, p. 17; Proceedings, 1907, pp. 19-24). 
The scales for 1907-8 and for 1908-9 were signed in the final con- 
ferences. 

3 Proceedings, 1900, p. 46. The practice of holding preliminary 
conferences was begun in 1897 for the open pot and tank list 
(Proceedings, 1897, pp. 36, 101). In 1901 the majority of the flint 
prescription blowers withdrew from the American Flint Glass 
Workers' Union and joined the Glass Bottle Blowers' Association, 
and in 1902 preliminary conferences were begun with the manu- 
facturers of flint ware (Proceedings, 1902, pp. 21, 46). A pre- 
liminary conference for the machine jar and bottle list also has 
recently become an annual fixture (Proceedings, 1005, p. 63; Pro- 
ceedings, 1906, p. 62; Proceedings, 1907, p. 54; Proceedings, 1908, 
p. 40). 



38 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

same method of comparison and estimate. 1 In 1887 the 
union adopted the practice of conferring, after the annual 
convention, with the representatives of the manufacturers 
on the wage lists of the several departments. 2 Prior to 
that year the lists had been made up in convention and the 
local unions had tried to enforce them as adopted by the 
convention. The president of the union said at the time 
this new practice was inaugurated, " Settlements by the 
new policy will always be more thorough, better understood, 
and less liable to violation." 3 

In 1888 the Prescription and Chimney departments 
adopted the plan of conferring with the manufacturers on 
additions and revisions desired before the list was acted 
upon in the convention. 4 The practice of holding prelimi- 
nary conferences then spread to the other departments, and 
in most departments this became an annual practice. 5 The 
union policy in this respect, however, underwent change 
in 1897. I n that year the preliminary conferences were 

Mn 1897 the president of the Flints described the method of set- 
ting prices by comparison, with intent to bring the labor cost of 
each article into harmony with that of every other article on the 
same list, as "an old established principle of every department of 
our association " and " a principle which can not be overthrown " 
(Proceedings, 1897, pp. 50-53). 

2 The Flint Glass Workers' Union is made up of sixteen depart- 
ments. All but the mold-making department have piece rates, 
though both piece and time systems are used in the Cutting depart- 
ment. In February, 1909, the sixteen departments were, in the order 
of their numerical strength, (1) Pressed Ware, (2) Chimney, (3) 
Cutting, (4) Bulb, (5) Paste Mold, (6) Mold-Making, (7) Caster 
Place, (8) Punch Tumbler and Stem Ware, (9) Iron Mold, (10) 
Machine Jar and Bottle, (11) Shade and Globe, (12) White Liner, 
(13) Insulator, (14) Prescription, (15) Engraving, (16) Stopper 
Grinding (Quarterly Report of National Secretary, for the three 
months ending February 28, 1009). Each department has its own 
price list or " wage and move " list, a " move " being the number of 
pieces to be made in a half day. 

3 Proceedings, 1888, p. 32. 

4 Ibid., pp. 32, 57, 86, 88, 89. 

6 Proceedings, 1891, pp. 165, 178; Proceedings, 1892, pp. 15, 17, 19, 
25-33, 47, 53; Officers' Reports, 1895, pp. vii-xix. No conference 
was held in the Caster Place department prior to 1895 (Proceedings, 
1892, p. 56; Officers' Reports, 1895). It was not customary to hold 
a conference in the Cutting department (Proceedings, 1897, p. 30). 
In the Stoppering and Electric Bulb departments and, at that period, 
in the Paste Mold department, preliminary conferences were not 
held annually, but only as occasion required. 



The Piece Scale 39 

omitted in several of the departments, and the president 
of the union informed the convention that he did not think 
the preliminary conferences were of enough benefit to war- 
rant the expense. 1 Preliminary conferences were held less 
regularly and less generally thereafter. 2 In 1902 the presi- 
dent again declared his belief that the good accomplished 
by the preliminary conferences was not equal to their cost, 
and reported that the manufacturers had expressed the 
same opinion at the last conferences. He advised that three 
of the four departments which were then regularly holding 
such conferences should give up the practice. 3 All three 
voted to do so in the same convention. 4 Proposals for 
changes in the lists are now sent into the national office 
before the convention, acted upon there by the departments 
concerned, and the lists finally settled in conferences with 
the employers after the adjournment of the convention. 

The systems of piece-rate making just described are suc- 
cessful in that they establish and maintain wage payments 
for diversified products with sufficient uniformity in the 
various localities where the trade is established to prevent 
disputes serious enough to lead to strikes. However, many 
difficulties have been encountered in the fixing of prices, 
involving anxiety on the part of the union lest misunder- 
standings occur in pricing new or special ware locally, or 

1 Proceedings, 1897, pp. 30, 34. 

2 Officers' Reports, 1899, p. 20. Preliminary conferences were held 
in 1899 in the Prescription, the Chimney, and the Shade departments. 
The Pressed Ware and Iron Mold departments voted in the 1898 
convention to abolish them (Ibid., p. 20; Proceedings, 1901, p. 49; 
Proceedings, 1902, p. 104). 

3 Proceedings, 1902, p. 104. 

4 Ibid., pp. 181-2, 295, 305. The Chimney department also voted 
to abolish annual preliminary conferences. However, a preliminary 
conference was held in that department in 1908, and other mid-year 
conferences have been held (Proceedings, 1902, p. 363; Proceedings, 
1904, p. 123; Proceedings, 1906, p. 16; Proceedings, 1908, p. 32). A 
preliminary conference was held on the machine jar and bottle list 
in 1908 (Proceedings, 1908, p. 29). Conferences have also been 
held at various times during the blast year in several other depart- 
ments ; but these have not been called to consider itemized revisions 
of the list, but to decide disputed prices for new work or other 
price disputes, or for general matters such as percentage advances, 
sliding scales, summer stops, and regulation of machinery. 



40 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

some ware, through differences in interpretation, be graded 
lower than is contemplated by the scale. Such difficulties 
must exist in the absence of physical standards for the 
identification of product for rating, and for guidance in 
fixing comparative prices. 

The officers of the Glass Bottle Blowers' Association have 
from time to time felt keenly the force of these difficulties in 
the way of maintaining a smoothly-working price list, and 
have frequently urged the Association to seek some system 
of pricing that would eliminate or reduce them. In 1900, 
for instance, the president of the union told the convention 
that at the May conference in that year prices had to be 
fixed " on a store box full of samples " and that three days 
had been given up to wrangling over them. He then advised 
the convention, "If our list is not sufficiently plain to enable 
a blower to know the exact price of the ware he is making 
it should be altered and simplified, as this means not only a 
saving in time and money but also more harmonious rela- 
tions between the employer and the employee." 1 The sug- 
gestion was made that a list might be constructed on the 
basis of the weight of ware alone, and a committee was ap- 
pointed to consider a revision of the list as it stood, and to 
include in its consideration this suggestion for reducing 
pricing to a basis of weight. 

The purpose of the committee as described by the presi- 
dent was to reach " a comprehensive plan which would make 
it possible for every man to know the exact price of the 
bottle he is making, or the list basis for that bottle from 
which he can figure the price." At the final wage confer- 
ence following the convention the employers appointed a 
similar committee to meet with the union committee, for a 
joint overhauling of the list in order to remove ambiguities 
and make the list thoroughly comprehensive and consistent. 2 
The workers' committee decided against a list based upon 
weight alone; it was opposed to adopting such a list unless 

1 Proceedings, 1900, pp. 46, 67-69, 9°- 

2 Proceedings, 1901, p. 27. 



The Piece Scale 41 

the same basis should be applied to all lines of ware, with 
possibly a few exceptions of peculiar design or odd shapes, 
and many members were against doing away with capacity 
as a qualification of weight, largely on account of the reduc- 
tions it would involve in the prices of some bottles. 1 The 
joint committee was also unable to agree on an itemized 
revision acceptable to both sides. 2 The president of the 
union in his report to the 1902 convention again advised that 
the list " sadly needs revision " and regretted that such a 
revision then seemed impossible. He expressed the hope 
that a more generous sentiment would be developed by both 
sides so that "a more plain and equitable basis of listing 
all kinds of ware " might be adopted. 3 A thorough revi- 
sion has not yet been effected though the list has been some- 
what simplified. 4 

Troublesome questions in the fixing of prices arise from 
time to time, and disputes and misunderstandings in the 
local application of the list continue to vex. 5 The president 
of the union has frequently complained that the list was 
not satisfactorily applied locally and that the branches of 
the union do not make thorough attempts to price bottles 
from the regular list before sending them in to the pre- 
liminary conference for settlement, but in this respect also 
there has been improvement. 6 

1 Proceedings, 1900, pp. 60, 61 ; Proceedings, 1906, p. 63. Some 
kinds of bottles, however, as for instance, olive bottles, have a price 
list varying with weight alone, except for a few special bottles 
mentioned by name and given other prices than the straight weight 
prices. 

2 Proceedings, 1902, p. 47 ; Minutes of the Preliminary Conference, 
May, 1902, pp. 19, 20. 

3 Proceedings, 1902, p. 47. 

* Proceedings, 1903, pp. 18, 83 ; Proceedings, 1904, p. 19. 

6 Proceedings, 1900, pp. 67-8; Proceedings, 1905, p. 17; Wage Scale 
and Working Rules, blast of 1904-5, sec. 7 ; Wage Scale and Work- 
ing Rules, blast of 1908-9, sec. 31 ; Minutes of Preliminary Confer- 
ence, May, 1902, p. 20; Report of Proceedings of Joint Wage Com- 
mittee, 1903 ; Minutes of Preliminary Conference, 1904 ; Blowers' 
Reports of Final Wage Conferences, 1907 and 1908. 

6 Disputes arising during the blast as to rules, regulations, and 
prices in the list are decided by the president of the union, his de- 
cision standing unless reversed or modified at the next wage con- 
ference. This plan was first adopted at the 1902 preliminary con- 



42 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

In the Prescription department of the Flint Glass Work- 
ers' Association, which was made up of bottle blowers and 
so offers the strongest analogy to the Glass Bottle Blowers' 
Association, the preparation of a satisfactory list was not 
found less difficult nor the application of the list any more 
harmonious or uniform. In his report to the 1892 conven- 
tion the president of the union stated that many of the listed 
bottles were not sufficiently described, and were not known 
" outside the Prescription committee room and the particu- 
lar factory in which they are made." 1 He complained 
further that there had been disputes in all parts of the 
union's jurisdiction regarding the variations in price to be 
made for differences in capacity. In many instances the 
disputed bottles exceeded or fell below the capacity of the 
nearest bottle on the list, and in nearly all cases the manu- 
facturers contended for a settlement on the basis of the 
lower capacity. He added, " The position of the manufac- 
turers may be attributed in most cases to the absence of any 
definite rule on the point in question." In 1898 the presi- 
dent called attention to the " inconsistencies and ambigui- 
ties •" in the list due to the great number of bottles identified 
only by name and number. He urged that the Prescription 
department should revise its list, "making it clear, making 
all its parts agree, removing duplicate bottles, and simpli- 
fying it wherever it can be simplified." 2 The withdrawal 
in 190 1 of a very large part of the Prescription department 
members to join the Glass Bottle Blowers' Association 

ference to provide for the decision of disputed points in the rules, 
but was later extended to cover prices. The resolution adopted 
in May 1002 read : " Whereas it appears that there is often an 
honest difference of opinion in regard to the interpretation of some 
of the rules and regulations adopted even among the members of 
this joint body.; therefore be it, Resolved, that all information 
wanted in regard to the intent or meaning of the rules and regula- 
tions shall be referred to the President of the Blowers' Associa- 
tion, whose decision in such case shall be binding until said decision 
shall be reported to and reviewed by the Joint Conference " (Minutes 
of Preliminary Conference, May, 1902, p. 21). See also Proceed- 
ings, 1908, p. 39; Blowers' Report of Final Wage Conference, 1908, 
pp. 14-15, 21, 22; Wage Scale and Working Rules, 1908-9, sec. 57. 

1 Proceedings, 1892, pp. 20, 21. 

2 Proceedings, 1898, p. 43. 



The Piece Scale 43 

greatly reduced the relative importance of its list problems 
for the general officers of the Flint Association. 1 

The Prescription department did not stand alone in its 
difficulties. Pricing by the method of comparison led to 
"inconsistencies and ambiguities" in the lists of the other 
departments, particularly in the Pressed Ware, Iron Mold, 
Paste Mold, and Shade lists. For instance in 1896 the 
president reported that some houses were getting 1,110 
tumblers made for the price that other houses were paying 
for 825. He recommended that a rule should be adopted 
for the classification of common tumblers on the basis of 
dimensions and weight. 2 Entire uniformity on this kind of 
ware was not reached until a uniform classification on the 
basis of capacity was adopted in 1901. 3 

The necessity of fixing the price of new work appearing 
during the blast by local determination has also made diffi- 
culty in keeping prices standard. The prevailing rule is 
that such new work shall be priced in the locality in which 
it is first made if the factory committee and the manufac- 
turer can agree on a price; if not, the price must be fixed in 
a joint wage conference. 4 The local union affected by a 
price so established is required to report it at once to the 
national officers, who inform the trade of the price estab- 
lished. 5 This system requires great care if non-uniformi- 

1 At the time of the 1908 convention no membership was given for 
the Prescription department (Proceedings, 1908, p. 75). In the 
Quarterly Report of the National Secretary for the three months 
ending February 28, 1909, its membership is given as thirty-nine. 

2 Proceedings, 1896, p. 63. 

3 Proceedings, 1901, p. 49. Similar instances have occurred in this 
and other departments. See Proceedings, 1892, pp. 45-46; Proceed- 
ings, 1903, p. 120; Proceedings, 1907, p. 54. In 1901 the manu- 
facturers presented a revised list in the Paste Mold department in 
order to remove "incongruities." The workers objected that the 
proposed list was not itself harmonious and it was not adopted 
(Proceedings, 1901, p. 42). 

4 Constitution, 1895, Art. X, sec. 2; Constitution, 1907, Art. XVII, 
sec. 2. 

5 If no agreement is reached locally or if the price established 
locally is considered too high by any other manufacturer or too low 
by any other local union it is referred to a joint wage conference for 
settlement. Several joint conferences for the settlement of new 
prices or disputed prices, in addition to the annual conference follow- 
ing the convention for the establishment of the list, may be held 
during the blast. Either side may call a conference at short notice. 



44 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

ties are to be avoided. Local unions have frequently- 
neglected to report the new pieces and prices with sufficient 
explicitness, with the result that the same work has been 
priced less elsewhere. 1 The president of the union has sev- 
eral times urged the necessity of having new work properly- 
listed and promptly reported to the trade in explicit terms. 2 
It is now the practice for the branches to refer the unlisted 
article to the national office to ascertain if there is any record 
of a similar article having been priced at another factory 
since the publication of the wage list. 

Difficulties have frequently arisen in distinguishing vari- 
ous pieces named in the price list. In 1892 the president of 
the union pointed out that it was hard to identify certain 
lines of ware in the Iron Mold list and recommended the 
preparation of an illustrated catalogue to accompany the 
list. 3 In the same year the Shade and Globe committee 
adopted in conference a plan to number shades and globes 
instead of entering them by name and to publish a new cata- 
logue containing a drawing of each piece with its number. 4 
At the convention in 1897 the Paste Mold committee also 
recommended "the printing of an illustrated catalogue of 
the articles produced by the Paste Mold department, giving 
weights, dimensions, moves, and wages." 5 But difficulties 
in classification and identification were not ended by this 
action. 6 In 1903 the president urged the Iron Mold depart- 
ment to make its list more explicit and "readjust its incon- 
gruities." 7 In 1902 he stated that "the Caster Place list 
as it is now compiled is confusing and misleading." 8 

1 Officers' Reports, 1835, p. 11; Officers' Reports, 1899, p. 37. 

2 Proceedings, 1901, p. ,57; Proceedings, 1903, p. 122; Proceedings, 
1904, p. 25; Proceedings, 1906, p. 7. 

3 Proceedings, 1892, pp. 36-38. 

4 Ibid., pp. 38, 53, 147. 

B Proceedings, 1897, p. 198. 

6 Proceedings, 1902, pp. 28, 42 ; Proceedings, 1907, p. 16. 

7 Proceedings, 1903, p. 120. 

8 Proceedings, 1902, p. 43. In 1904 the National Association of 
Manufacturers of Pressed and Blown Glassware in proposing a 
joint committee to revise and classify the different lists, said: 
" They have become so large and cumbersome that they are in 
many cases self-contradictory and misleading. By classifying all 



The Piece Scale 45 

The necessity of providing for the settlement of questions 
arising in the application of the list to particular cases en- 
tails an appreciable burden upon the union and forms a part 
of the cost of keeping up a workable piece system. By 
1895 courts of appeals had been established in the Chimney, 1 
Prescription, Pressed Ware, and Iron Mold departments 
for the settlement of such disputed points. 2 At present the 
practice has become general in all departments, except in 
the Chimney department, which still retains its court of 
appeals, 3 to refer such disagreements as can not be settled 
locally to the joint wage committee of the department. 4 In 
1904 the president of the union, referring to the necessity of 
adjusting disputes in this manner, said, "The system has 
added to our expense, yet I confess I do not see how we 
can avoid it with safety to our interests." 5 

The experience of the Potters also illustrates the diffi- 
culties encountered in applying directly the measure of com- 
parative time. 6 The policy followed has been to fix new 
prices by comparison with the time required to do other 
work on the list already priced. The estimated time re- 
quired is subject to change, but comparison in physical char- 
articles according to size, weight, and measurement, and consider- 
ing the different shapes as to the relative difficulty of making the 
goods the list could be very much simplified and much more easily 
understood" (Proceedings, 1904, p. 83). 

1 Reports of Officers, 1895, p. xxi ; Proceedings, 1896, p. 50. 

2 Constitution, 1895, Art. X, sec. 6. 

8 Wage and Move List of Chimney Branch, 1908-9, Rules 13 and 14. 

4 See above, p. 39, note. 

6 Proceedings, 1904, p. 18. 

6 The Potters' system of making lists in conference is more recent 
than and lacks the established regularity of that of the Bottle Blow- 
ers and the Flint Association. There is no provision for regular 
preliminary conferences. The scale has in recent years been signed 
for one year in the sanitary branch and for two years with respect 
to general ware. Ware not covered in the list is priced locally; 
in case of dispute a ruling is made by a joint standing committee, 
and prices set by the standing committees become part of the list. 
There is one of these committees for the sanitary branch and two, 
an Eastern and a Western Standing Committee, for general ware 
(Wage Scale and Agreements between the Sanitary Manufacturing 
Potters' Association and National Brotherhood of Operative Potters, 
adopted November, 1907; Wage Scale and Agreements between the 
United States Potters' Association and National Brotherhood of 
Operative Potters, effective after October 1, 1907). 



46 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

acteristics when used as a basis has yielded unsatisfactory 
results. There has been difficulty too in applying the scale 
because of the introduction of slight differences in design 
which the manufacturers have contended did not warrant 
any change in the rate by way of addition, and because of 
misunderstandings in interpretation. 1 

The difficulties which have been experienced by these 
three unions, particularly by the Bottle Blowers and the 
Flint Glass Workers' Union, illustrate the seriousness of the 
problem of making comprehensive and clear uniform price 
lists to be applied over a wide territory, when the product 
is subject to numerous variations in pattern and design and 
when the comparative time required must be estimated sepa- 
rately for each particular variety. The liability to disagree- 
ments and non-uniformities is inherent in the system. Yet 
all three of these unions continue to work under the piece 
system and to direct their efforts to overcoming in so far as 
may be possible these technical difficulties. The unions 
prefer to work under the piece system in spite of its inher- 
ent difficulty. That they do this and that they and their 
employers remove the difficulties where they can and put up 
with them when they cannot, indicate that in these particu- 
lar cases at least piece work as such is not opposed by the 
unions. It also illustrates the degree to which the two par- 
ties to the wage bargain will overlook minor variations from 
intended standards when both are anxious to maintain the 
general basis of agreement. 

Forms of price lists providing for pattern diversification 
and intended for national application but much shorter than 
those just considered are also maintained in the clothing 
trade. The Garment Workers have a national minimum 
scale, agreed upon in conference, for work upon shirts and 
overalls. Each distinct style or pattern has its price and 
specific additions are stipulated for many specified "ex- 
tras." The certain application of the rate to the particular 
type of garment for which it is intended is assured by the 

1 Proceedings, 1906, p. 5 ; Reports of President and First Vice 
President to 1908 Convention, 1908, pp. 24-25. 



The Piece Scale 47 

filing of sample garments which are referred to in the list 
as " exhibits A," " B " and " C," etc. 1 

The Tailors' price lists are made locally and the prices 
vary from locality to locality, but there is a close approach 
to uniformity in the form of the scales. Disputes over the 
interpretation of local scales in matters of styles, materials, 
etc., had become so frequent that in 1905 the secretary urged 
the convention to formulate a price bill which should be uni- 
form throughout the jurisdiction of the union, if adopted by 
referendum. The convention adopted the recommendation 
and after ratification by the members, a committee was ap- 
pointed to draft a bill, 2 to be uniformly observed in all 
respects but prices, which were to be left to the local 
unions. 3 The uniform bill, so reported, was adopted by 
referendum vote, 4 and at the 1907 convention the secretary 
reported that the local unions generally were following it 
with very satisfactory results. 5 

The experience of the stove-molding branch of the iron- 
molding trade in framing and applying price lists has been 
an interesting one. Each shop has its own separate list in 
which the price of each distinct pattern made in the shop 
is entered. In the early days of stove molding in this coun- 
try the castings were paid for by weight. 6 The growing 
diversification in the patterns of stoves made it soon neces- 
sary, however, to fix separate prices for each kind of stove, 
and thereafter, as the subdivision of the work in the making 
of stoves proceeded, for each piece of the stove. 7 The 
union also threw its influence in favor of payment by the 
individual piece. 8 There were many inequalities in prices 

1 General Secretary's Report of the Joint Wage Scale Conferences, 
held July, 1905, January, 1906. 

2 Proceedings, 1905, in The Tailor, February, 1905, pp. 9, 58, 59. 

3 The Tailor, August, 1905. 

4 Ibid., December, 1905. 

5 Ibid., March, September, 1906; August, 1907, p. 4. 

6 Iron Molders' Journal, March 1875; July, 1876; January, 1888, 
p. 4; March, 1902, p. 129. 

7 In the price list of the Cincinnati union in 1866 separate prices 
are given for the pieces and the price of the stove as a whole is 
also given (International Journal, October, 1866, p. 223). 

8 President's Report to the Thirteenth Session, in Iron Molders' 
Journal, July, 1876. 



48 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

of stove castings even in the same shop. 1 In 1862 the Phila- 
delphia local union, the oldest and best organized in the 
trade, with a membership of 440, gave up a demand for a 
general increase on all castings for an " equalization of stove 
prices . . . bringing the lower up to the higher." 2 In 1875 
the president of the national union urged the local unions 
to insist that all prices should be ratified by the shop com- 
mittee and entered in a price book in the shop. 3 Some in- 
equalities were still in evidence 4 when in 1893 the national 
union made an agreement with the Stove Founders' Na- 
tional Defense Association under which price advances or 
reductions were to be uniform percentages of the prices 
then existing in the various shops. Means were also pro- 
vided for adjusting prices. 5 

The system of pricing new work which has prevailed 
since 1893 under this agreement is as follows: 6 If work "of 
similar character and grade " has already been made in the 
foundry the new work is priced by comparison with it. 
"When there are no comparative stoves made in the shop 
the prices shall be based upon competitive stoves made in 
the district, thorough comparison and proper consideration 
being given to the merits of the work according to the labor 
involved." 7 New work is not priced until it has been made 
for at least six days, and the price committee is required to 
consult the molder working on the new work before fixing 
on a price for it. These two rules adopted by the conven- 
tion in 1907 made universal a widely prevalent practice. 8 

1 International Molders' Journal, July, 1866, p. 240. 

2 Iron Molders' Journal, June, 1874, p. 385; May, 1881. 

3 Ibid., September, 1875, p. 426. 

4 Ibid., January, 1887, p. 4. 

5 Conference Agreements in Force and Ruling between the Iron 
Molders Union of N. A. and the Stove Founders N. D. A., issued 
June, 1907, Clauses^ 8, 14. The system of collective fixing of prices 
in the stove trade is described in detail by John P. Frey and J. R. 
Commons in the Bulletin of the Bureau of Labor, No. 62. 

6 Under an agreement in force until 1907 the Stove Mounters and 
the Defense Association set prices by the same method (Agreements 
in Force between the S. F. N\ D. A. and the Stove Mounters and 
Steel Range Workers' International Union, Clauses 5, 7, 8). 

7 Conference Agreements, Clauses 7, 14. 

8 Proceedings, 1907, pp. 125, 200. 



The Piece Scale 49 

When the shop committee and the employer or his foreman 
cannot agree on a price it is referred for adjustment to two 
representatives, one from each of the national organizations 
concerned. Final appeal lies to the national joint confer- 
ence committee which also determines all large questions 
relating to wages. 1 

The system followed in the stove trade for making and 
applying piece prices locally, in general conformity with a 
scheme of national scope and of district uniformity, makes 
piece pricing very nearly exact and removes the liability of 
strikes on account of particular prices. It has been urged 
within the union from time to time that weight or measure- 
ment be adopted as a guide, in order to do away with diffi- 
culties and differences emerging under the present system. 2 
Neither of these measures have commended themselves as 
practical except as guides in using prices already agreed 
upon as a basis for the prices of similar parts of larger or 
smaller stoves of the same pattern. The necessity still re- 
mains of pricing the initial piece. "The pricing of stove- 
plate molding can never be reduced to an exact science ; the 
union must rely on comparisons with similar stoves whose 
molding price is conceded to be equitable and upon the intel- 
ligence and experience of price committees and superin- 
tendents." 3 

Materials used.— The second grand cause of differentia- 
tion in the piece price, standing next in order of importance 
to differences in the shape, pattern or dimensions of the 
product, are differences in the materials worked. Rate dif- 
ferentiation according to the material used, irrespective of 
variations in the dimensions or shape of the product are 

1 Conference Agreements, Clauses 2, 3. 

2 Iron Molders' Journal, May, 1886; January, 1887; February, p. 70, 
July, 1902. 

3 Ibid., April, 1902, p. 206. In commenting on this statement a 
member a few months later wrote to the Journal that if each member 
of a moulders' pricing committee should write the price of the piece 
in question on a separate piece of paper independently, no two of 
the prices thus separately made would be the same (Ibid., July, 1902, 
p. 379). 

4 



50 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

common. 1 In some of the unions the differences in rates 
to be made for differences of this nature give comparatively 
little trouble, because one material is used almost exclu- 
sively, or because the different materials are well known 
and clearly distinguishable. In other trades some of the 
chief difficulties in rate adjustment and in the enforcement 
of a uniform rate have been caused by differences in mate- 
rials. 2 Though the variations in materials are but a fraction 
of those in dimension or pattern, the addition or subtraction 
to be made to prices when a new material is used gives 
much more trouble than the setting of a price on a new 
pattern, since in most instances the price differentiation for 
a material will affect wages more than that for a single pat- 
tern, and each side is therefore less likely to be inclined to 
give way even a little. The proper differential to be granted 
is also difficult to determine. As comparative difficulty in 
working different materials cannot be estimated by physical 
measurement, the estimated time required for production 
has to be relied upon directly as a measure. But production 
time is a more variable standard in different plants when 
applied to materials than when applied to patterns. Once 
the price differential for a given material is established in 
the scale, however, there is less room for misunderstanding 
than in the case of different patterns. 

The questions of rate differentiation which have dis- 
turbed the Iron, Steel and Tin Workers have been almost 
entirely over materials. The variations according to dimen- 
sions follow comparatively simple lines, and this and the 
greater effect upon earnings of price differentials according 
to materials used have made the latter relatively important, 
particularly in the "boiling" or "puddling" division. In 

1 In addition to the variations to be noticed in puddling, in rolling 
iron and steel, and in cigar making, there are difference in rates for 
differences in materials in the scales of the Tailors, the Elastic 
Goring Weavers, the Mule Spinners, and the Glass Bottle Blowers, 
and in the local price lists of some branches of the Boot and Shoe 
Workers. 

2 This is true, of course, in those unions whose rates vary with 
materials rather than with patterns, like the miners, the puddlefs, 
and the longshoremen. 



The Piece Scale 5 1 

this division there is no question of form or pattern; pay- 
ment per ton is made for working metal through a process, 
not for reducing it to given shapes or dimensions. The rate 
per ton for boilers or puddlers was made originally on the 
assumption that pig iron of known grade should be worked 
and the first scales provided for this alone. 1 

The manufacturers soon began to introduce other mate- 
rials to be worked with pig iron, or in place of it, and often 
these substitute materials were mixed. This practice gave 
rise to disagreements as to the prices to be paid, and conse- 
quently to the need of providing standard rates for these 
several materials and mixtures. As early as 1871 there was 
a bitter local dispute as to the rate to be paid for a certain 
kind of iron, and the men were sustained by the union in 
their fight for a differential price. 2 By 1875 it had become 
important that the prices to be paid for working " castings," 
" hoop iron," and " scrap " should be put in the scale. In 
the convention of that year a committee of the union pointed 
out that these materials involved extra work and should 
therefore carry extra compensation, and recommended that 
uniformly higher prices should be adopted for them. 3 The 
prices to be paid were not settled, however, until five years 
later. In 1877 the question of what price should be paid 
for working physic iron was brought before the convention. 
The convention ruled that it should be rated at one-fourth 
more than common iron. 4 From 1881 to 1908 five prices 
were added to the scale for materials rated higher than 
common iron, and prices were also added for materials rated 
at less than the common boiling price. 5 

1 The boilers were then organized in the National Forge of the 
United Sons of Vulcan, which was one of the organizations merged 
into the Amalgamated Association. The first two scales are given in 
the Annual Report of the Bureau of Industrial Statistics, State of 
Pennsylvania, 1878-9, p. 152; the scale for 1879 is given in the Pro- 
ceedings of the Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel and Tin 
Workers, 1880, Appendix. 

2 Vulcan Record, Vol. 1, no. 9, p. 10. 

3 Ibid., Vol. 1, no. 16, p. 57. 

4 Proceedings, 1877, p. 83. 

"Pittsburgh Scale of Prices, June, 1881-June, 1882; Western Scale 
of Prices, 1908-9. 



52 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

This evolution has been marked by many disputes, the 
emergence of many vexing questions for officers and con- 
ventions, and the introduction of many rates of an experi- 
mental and temporary character. One of the most trouble- 
some of these questions has been as to the price to be paid 
for mixtures of two materials already rated. 1 The conven- 
tion of 1894 added a clause to the scale to the effect that 
when mixed material not provided for in the scale is worked, 
the price shall be the mean price between those of the mate- 
rials used. 2 In spite of this provision and in spite of much 
classification of materials and mixtures, disagreements as to 
the price to be paid for particular mixtures have been fre- 
quent. 3 

Another important question of rate differentiation to meet 
a difference in materials was raised in the finishing divisions 
of the Amalgamated Association when the practice began 
of rolling steel in what had been iron mills. The question 
first came up for consideration in the 1880 convention, when 
a resolution was unanimously adopted that in mills not 
working steel as a specialty " price and one-half " should be 
paid. 4 In 1884 it was provided that "iron mills (except 
sheet mills) working steel shall pay price and one-half for 
steel, except mild steel, that is steel of which the output is 
as great as the output of iron when working the same sizes, 
but when the output of steel is but three-fourths the output 
of iron the rule price and one-half shall apply." 5 

1 For instance, the price to be paid for mixing swarth with scrap 
was hard to settle. It was before the convention several times, and 
in 1887 the president urged the fixing of a special rate for it. The 
convention did not set a standard rate then and the question con- 
tinued to make trouble (Proceedings, 1885, pp. 1564, 1573; Proceed- 
ings, 1886, p. 1795; Proceedings, 1887, p. 1948; Proceedings, 1893, 
p. 4231). 

2 Proceedings, 1894, p. 4653. This did not apply to metal, which 
was rated at fifty cents above the boiling price. 

8 For example, Proceedings, 1895, p. 4889; Journal of the Annual 
Session, 1902, p. 6434; Journal of the Annual Session, 1903, pp. 6704, 
6715, 7022. 

4 Proceedings, 1880, pp. 444, 971 ; Pittsburgh Scale of Prices, 
1881-1882; Wheeling Scale of Prices, 1881-1882. 

6 Pittsburgh Scale of Prices in Rolling Mills, for the year end- 
ing May 31, 1885. 



The Piece Scale 53 

This rule as to the price differential for steel did not settle 
the question. The president of the union reported in 1886 
that there was no uniform price observed for working steel 
and that the question of the price to be paid gave rise to 
many disagreements. The policy of the union had been, he 
said, to ask more for steel than for iron on the ground that 
the same output could not be reached, especially on rolls 
adapted particularly to iron, but some of the members had 
been spurred on by the higher prices to greatly increased 
outputs and had so jeopardized those prices. He asked that 
the price for steel be so fixed as to avoid further disputes. 1 
The scale was then changed for one class of finishing mills 
so as to make the price the same as for rolling iron. 2 The 
output gradually increased, with the result foretold by the 
president. By 1902 the rates for finishing steel had dropped 
slightly below that for iron. 3 In 1906 there was another 
reduction in steel rates as compared with those for iron. 4 
In the sheet mills, too, a higher price was maintained down 
to 1904 for steel than for iron for rolling the lighter gauges. 5 

The piece scales of the Cigar Makers have long varied 
with the materials used. The price lists call for higher 
prices for " mixed seed and Havana " than for " seed," that 
is, domestic tobacco, and still higher for clear Havana fillers. 
The quality of the wrapper also enters at times as a determi- 
nant. 6 The higher prices for the finer materials are dic- 
tated by the necessity of more careful workmanship, but 
also by the fact that the manufacturer obtains a higher price 
proportionately for such cigars. 7 The Cigar Makers have 

1 Proceedings, 1886, p. 1756. 

2 Ibid, pp. 1825, 1861. 

3 Western Scale of Prices, for year ending June 30, 1903. 

4 Amalgamated Journal, June 21, 1906. Where the output of steel 
is but three-fourths the output of iron the price is still one and one- 
half the iron price (Western Scale of Prices, 190&-9). 

5 Western Scale of Prices, 1903-4 ; Western Scale of Prices, 1904-5. 

6 List of Shops and Bill of Prices under the jurisdiction of Union 
97, Cigar Makers' International Union of America, Boston, Mass., 
Compiled February 20, 1908 ; Bill of Prices of Cigar Makers' Union, 
No. 1 of Baltimore, 1908. 

7 The journeyman cigar maker is expected to be able to make any 
of the cigars that are to be made, and on the higher-priced ones his 



54 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

comparatively little trouble now in enforcing this differen- 
tial, but such was not always the case. The Baltimore Cigar 
Makers in March, 1880, adopted a resolution that "no old 
jobs disguised as new ones be allowed to come into the shops 
for less than the original price." 1 During the spring of that 
year several strikes occurred because employers attempted 
to enforce the common cigar rate for " seed and Havana " 
cigars. 2 

Physical conditions. — Closely analogous to the adjust- 
ment of rates to take account of differences in materials is 
the establishment of differentials to meet differences in 
physical conditions which make the performance of the 
worker's task more difficult for each unit. Differences of 
this kind are comparatively rare. In most piece-working 
unions with national or sectional scales the conditions for 
production are assumed to be standardized, and if appre- 
ciably departed from, special provisions for payment, not 
differential piece rates, are to apply. In some trades, how- 
ever, there are conditions which it is difficult to reduce to 
uniformity and which affect directly the difficulty of reach- 
ing output. In bituminous coal mining, for instance, the 
thickness of the vein is such a condition, strongly resembling 
the character of the materials worked as a variant. Differing 
rates for mining according to the thickness of the vein are 
common. 3 More obvious instances appear where the piece 
worker's task is loading, unloading, moving or packing the 
product. The Longshoremen's rates on the Great Lakes for 

earnings will be greater per day than on the lower-priced ones. 
The higher are not reduced to yield only the same earnings as the 
lower partly because the higher are felt to compensate in the long 
run for some of the "poorer jobs" and partly because it is felt that 
the employer can afford to pay more for them. 

1 MS. Minutes of Baltimore Cigar Makers, March 18, 1880. 

2 Ibid., May 7, May 14, May 28, 1880; Cigar Makers' Journal, 
March, 1883. 

8 The Indiana scale provides, for instance, that all coal less than 3 
feet 3 inches and more than 2 feet 9 inches in thickness shall pay $.98 
per ton, as against $1.06 per ton for coal from 2 feet 9 inches to 2 
feet in thickness (Terre H^ate Agreement between Indiana Bitu- 
minous Coal Operators and United Mine Workers of America, Dis- 
trict Number 11, 1908). 



The Piece Scale 55 

unloading vary with the hold measurements of the vessel, 
and are higher for boats over three feet from the dock. 
Double the ordinary rate is paid for unloading ore from a 
wet boat. 1 Similar differences appear in the Chicago Brick 
Makers' rates for loading and unloading bricks. 2 

The Hatters' price lists offer an interesting departure in 
the classification of the product for rate differentiation. 
The hats are differentiated in rate according to the materials 
used. But this is not entirely the case, and the different 
rate classes are commonly entered in the list in terms of the 
selling price of the hats, so that physical standards are lack- 
ing for the pricing of new work or the settlement of dis- 
putes as to proper rate classification. 3 Moreover, the rate 
differentiation is not based on comparative difficulty alone. 
As in the case of the Cigar Makers, the more highly-priced 
grades are expected to return higher earnings to the worker 
in proportion to the time required. A price list of this char- 
acter naturally is difficult to apply with smoothness. Dis- 
agreements as to the grades to which hats rightfully belong 
have arisen frequently, the men contending that the hats 
belonged to a more highly rated grade than that to which 
the employer assigned them. 4 

Price of the finished article. — Differentiation in rate ac- 
cording to pattern or materials is often not based entirely 
on comparative difficulty, and this fact is fully recognized 

Proceedings, 1905, p. no; Agreement between International 
Longshoremen's Association and Managers of Docks at Lake Erie 
Ports, 1905. 

2 District Council No. 1, International Brick, Tile and Terra Cotta 
Workers Alliance, Working Rules, 1907-10. 

In the 1904 convention of the Boot and Shoe Workers the pres- 
ident reported that the workers were much dissatisfied in places 
because the piece workers had to wait between pieces of work and 
" to run from one part of the factory to another to assemble his 
work." An improvement in the system, he pointed out, is equivalent 
to an increase in wages. It is not the price per pair but what the 
worker can earn which is "the infallible determining factor as to 
the standard of wages" (Proceedings, 1904). 

3 Journal of the United Hatters, April, 1899; Proceedings, 1903, p. 
74; Proceedings, 1907, p. 117. 

4 Journal of the United Hatters, October, 1899; August, 1900; July 
August, 1902; February, 1903; Minutes of Meeting of Executive 
Board and Proceedings of the Board of Directors, August 22, 1907. 



56 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

by both sides. Other considerations, particularly the sell- 
ing price of the different varieties, as has been noted, may 
enter to secure certain patterns or lines of product higher 
or lower rates than they would receive if rated according to 
the difficulty of producing them as compared with other 
work on the list. If these patterns or classes of product are 
clearly distinguishable no difficulty need arise in the appli- 
cation of the scale. But if such difficulty does arise it can- 
not be settled by reference to comparative time required for 
production. 

Instances of higher prices in proportion to difficulty for 
the more valuable grades have already been noticed in the 
cases of the Cigar Makers and the Hatters. Cutters work- 
ing under the piece system in the glove and in the boot and 
shoe industries are in some places paid proportionally more 
for the more valuable patterns. This is to induce them to 
secure a larger number of the more valuable "cuts" from 
the material than they would if prices were exactly in con- 
formity with difficulty, and if high earnings could be made 
on the less valuable patterns as easily as on the more valua- 
ble. On the other hand, price considerations may keep the 
rates for some varieties of product below the level of wages 
which has been established for the list as a whole on the 
basis of time* required. The Glass Bottle Blowers, for in- 
stance, were unable in 1906 to secure an increase requested on 
a particular line of ware in order to bring these rates to an 
equality with the rest of the list, because the manufacturers 
declared that the increased rates could not be paid on ac- 
count of foreign competition. 1 A similar situation existed 
for years as to the differential to be paid for " turn mold " 
or "twisted" ware. In the 1899 preliminary conference the 
union attempted to establish a higher rate for turn mold 
than for ordinary ware on the ground that it was harder to 
make and at the same rates gave less earnings than other 
ware. The manufacturers would not agree to the proposed 
increase, arguing that turn-mold bottles could not be sold 

1 Proceedings, 1899, pp. 38, 39. 



The Piece Scale 57 

if the price were raised, as other bottles had been brought 
to such a high standard that they would be substituted for 
the turn-mold ware. The union representatives replied that 
" regardless of what the customer preferred a man ought to 
be paid according to the labor and skill expended." The 
following year the manufacturers again successfully with- 
stood the same demand, using the same argument, and ad- 
mitting that the blowing of turn-mold ware involved more 
work. 1 It was not until 1907 that an increase of ten per 
cent, for such ware was secured. 2 

The introduction of machinery has affected the blowers' 
rates on certain kinds of bottles, and certain shapes have 
been reduced in rate to meet the competition of the machine 
on the same ware. A very obvious case is that of fruit jars. 
When machine-blown jars were introduced into the trade in 
the late nineties the manufacturers of hand-blown jars 
asked for a reduction in rates to meet the competition of the 
machine-made jars. The union refused in 1897 to comply 
with the request, the president expressing the belief that it 
would be " a long time before the machine interferes se- 
riously with our members in the jar trade." 3 In 1898 it was 
apparent that some reduction would have to be made, and 
the amount of it was left to the discretion of the president. 
A reduction of from 35 to 45 per cent, was finally accepted. 4 
There had been, of course, no change in the difficulty of 
blowing jars as compared with other ware on the regular 
list. However, most of the men who had been blowing jars 
could not blow other lines of ware satisfactorily. 5 

The introduction of finishing machines affected the blow- 
ers' prices in the other direction. On ware not finished at 
the " glory hole " by the blowers, but finished in the machine, 

1 Proceedings, 1901, p. 10. 

2 Proceedings, 1905, p. 16; Proceedings, 1907, p. 165; Wage Scale, 
1907-8, sec. 2. The fifty per cent, higher rate for opaque glass is 
purposely high because of the disinclination of the manufacturers 
to make that kind of ware. 

3 Proceedings, 1897, p. 13. 

4 Proceedings, 1899, p. 11; Proceedings, 1900, p. 93; Wage Scale, 
1908-9, sec. 2. 

6 Proceedings, 1898, pp. 11, 75. 



58 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

the rate was to be five-sixths of the regular list rate, except 
on jars and some other specified lines of ware. 1 The work 
of which the blowers were relieved was more than one- 
sixth; it was close to one-third. The blowers would have 
shared in the advantage of the reduction of the difficulty of 
production secured by the machine, but comparatively little 
finishing is now done by the machine. 

II 

Definition of Work 

The standardization of what is to be done by the worker 
for the rate is complementary to the standardization of the 
rate for each variety of product in securing a uniform rate 
of payment. The need for defining in the scale the tasks 
included in the workers' rate is created usually by misun- 
derstanding or non-uniformity in practice with respect either 
to (i) auxiliary work which may be done by the man who 
receives the rate but which it is not essential to the process 
that he rather than any other worker should do, or (2) the 
payment by the worker, instead of by the employer, of help- 
ers or other assistants aiding or working under the direction 
of the man receiving the piece rate. Definition of the work 
to be done for the rate so as to exclude from it auxiliary or 
minor operations does not mean necessarily that the recip- 
ient of the rate will not perform any of this extra work; 
often it means that such work will not be done except for 
extra payment. In the latter case definition facilitates the 
application of the principle generally insisted upon, and 
sometimes expressly stated in the scale, of " extra work, ex- 
tra pay." 2 

Proceedings, 1900, pp. 52, in; Proceedings, 1901, p. 13; Wage 
Scale, 1908-9, sec. 24. 

2 In the 1908 convention of the Shingle Weavers the president 
recommended the adoption of a rule to the effect that where the 
piece system was still worked local piece scales should be framed 
on the basis of the national time rates, " with a provision that wages 
be computed upon a certain sum above the day scale to cover the 
extra work for which pay is never given where it is necessary for 
members to do it on a piece work scale" (Proceedings, 1908, p. 25). 



The Piece Scale 59 

Auxiliary work. — In most cases what is to be done for 
the rate has been so well established in custom that there is 
little need to define it expressly in the scale. It is safe to 
assume, however, that the practice has not become settled 
without occasional vigorous protests by the workers against 
innovations. The Printers' local unions, for example, early 
adopted a rule that a printer was not to change matter that 
had been set up because of alterations in the copy, nor to 
distribute type he had not used, unless extra was paid for 
this work. 1 A strike of puddlers against an attempt to 
make them wheel their cinder, ore and " fix," and to clear 
out ashes, " so as to dispense with the usual force of labor- 
ing hands," occurred in 1875. The strike was successful 
and the custom of other mills in the district was followed in 
this regard. 2 

The Miners' scales commonly define what the miner is to 
do in addition to mining and loading the coal on cars. The 
Indiana miners agree with their employers that the miner's 
work " includes cutting the coal, drilling and blasting the 
same, loading the car at the face and properly timbering the 
miner's working place." 3 The Illinois scale contains a like 
provision. In addition to mining and loading the coal on 
the car the miner's work includes timbering his work places 
and, in long-wall mining, brushing and care of the work 
places and roadway. 4 

The work to be done by piece workers who are engaged 
about furnaces, as in iron puddling and in the glass-working 

Harnett, p. no. 

1 Vulcan Record, Vol. 1, no. 16, p. 31. 

3 Terre Haute Agreement between Indiana Bituminous Coal Oper- 
ators and United Mine Workers of America, District Number n, 
1906-1908. 

4 Illinois State Agreement from June 1, 1906, to March 31, 1908, 
between the Illinois Coal Operators' Association and the United 
Mine Workers of America, Fourth District. The work to be done 
by the miner was made the subject of decision by a joint committee 
in 1901 (Report of Industrial Commission, Vol. XVII, p. 335). 
This decision was embodied in the scale in 1902 (Proceedings of 
Joint Convention of Illinois Coal Operators' Association and United 
Mine Workers of America, District 12, February-March, 1902, p. 9). 
A question arose in 1906 as to the drilling of extra holes (Minutes 
of the Convention, 1906, p. 176). 



60 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

trades, seems to have been a considerable source of friction, 
because of a disposition to require the men to take part in 
preparing the furnaces or in looking after them when the 
" heats " are over. Sometimes the tasks of the worker have 
been defined in the scale primarily to safeguard the worker 
from what was felt to be an imposition; at other times a 
rule has been adopted to restrain individual workers from 
performing extra work about the furnaces in the fear that 
this might come to be included generally in the worker's 
task without increase in the rate. The Window Glass Work- 
ers' "working rules" state that assisting at the pot setting 
is part of the duty of blowers and gatherers, 1 but that no 
blower or gatherer is to get sand or clay or other material 
for pot setting, nor to turn pots or build furnace rings. 2 In 
the 1889 convention a resolution was adopted providing that 
if flatteners should mend flues or repair ovens they should 
have extra pay. 3 The Amalgamated Association of Iron, 
Steel and Tin Workers adopted a rule in 1899 that any tin 
roller or member of his crew who should " clean, grease, or 
change rolls or other castings unless such work be paid for " 
should be fined for the first offense, and for the second 
offense be expelled from the Association. 4 

Definition is often necessary, too, where the worker's task 
includes, or might include, the moving of materials. The 
Brick Makers' Chicago scale stipulates the distance brick is 
to be wheeled for the rate ; for distance in excess of that the 
employer furnishes an extra wheeler. 5 At the 1907 wage 
conference the Potters and their employers discussed a pro- 
constitution, 1908, Art. XVII, sec. 18; Report of Convention, 
1884; By-Laws, 1886, Art. VIII, sec. 38. The Flint Glass Workers 
adopted a rule at their 1907 convention that members of the Paste 
Mold department were not to do pot setting unless paid for the 
time lost while doing it (Proceedings, 1907, p. 125). 

2 Constitution, 1908, Art. XVII, sec. 19; Scale, 1908-9. 

3 Report of the Convention, 1889, p. ,55 ; Report of Convention, 
1884, p. 24. The 1884 convention adopted a rule that gatherers 
should not carry out rollers even when paid for it (Report of Con- 
vention, 1884, pp. 19, 32; By-Laws, 1886, Art. II, sees. 4, 30). 

Proceedings, 1889, p. 5574. 
5 Working Rules, 1907-1910. 



The Piece Scale 61 

posed rule that one hundred feet be the maximum distance 
which green saggers should be carried to the kilns. The 
manufacturers contended that in the majority of the plants 
the saggers were carried a greater distance, and that this 
had been considered when the prices were established. It 
was agreed that " unusual conditions " should be corrected, 
and the rule proposed by the saggermen was not adopted. 1 
An amendment was made to the scale at the same confer- 
ence providing that kilnmen and kiln drawers should not be 
required to " wheel, carry or throw out saggerheads." 2 The 
Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers' 
scale provides that all materials for busheling shall be placed 
within ten feet of the charging door. 3 

Payment of helpers. — Questions as to whether certain 
workers are to be paid by the recipients of the rate or as to 
what help is to be furnished to them by the employers, have 
occasionally demanded attention in a few trades. In March, 
1856, the attempt of the employers to make the men pay for 
" stripping " led to a strike of the Baltimore Cigar Makers, 
the members of the union agreeing to refuse to work for any 
employer who insisted on the men paying for this operation. 4 
The Window Glass Workers in 1884 adopted a rule that no 
flattener was to pay any part of the " layer-out's " wages or 
that of any help employed in the flattening house. 5 In the 
mule-spinning trade it has long been the custom for the spin- 
ners to pay the "back-boys" or to have the latter's wages 
deducted from the spinners' prices as fixed by the- list. 6 
Sometimes there has been disagreement as to the amount to 
be withheld for this purpose from the spinners' earnings. 7 

1 Reports of President and First Vice-President, 1908, p. 23. 

2 Scale in effect after October 1, 1907. 

3 A rule was adopted in 1899 that pipe, and scrap and boiler plate 
must be cut into eight inch pieces or smaller (Proceedings, 1899, 
P- 5643). 

4 MS. Minutes of Cigar Makers' Association of Maryland, Febru- 
ary 21, March 10, 1856. 

s Report of Convention, 1884, p. 25; By-Laws, 1886, Art. VIII, 
sec. 23. 

6 Fall River List of Prices for Mule Spinning, January 1, 1889; 
New Bedford Price List, 1908. 

'Report of National Spinners' Convention, 1907, p. 13; Report of 
Convention, 1908. 



62 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

The window glass blowers and gatherers for years sought 
to induce the employers to assume the obligation of paying 
the snapper's wages. The blowers and gatherers did not 
think that they should be required to pay these workers from 
their own wages and the differing wages paid by members to 
the snappers added to their hostility to the system. 1 In 1892 
the convention of the Window Glass Workers adopted the 
report of a committee which provided a scale to be paid to 
the snappers and imposed a fine on the blower or gatherer 
who should pay more than this. 2 In 1895 complaints were 
made that the snappers' wages were increasing, thereby re- 
ducing the wages of the blowers and gatherers, and the con- 
vention of this year adopted a resolution that the snappers* 
wages ought to be paid by the firms and that every effort 
should be made to have this rule established. 3 The 1896 
convention attached so much importance to this point that 
it voted that no settlement should be made with the manu- 
facturers until they agreed to pay the snappers' wages. 4 
This rule was not then established, but in the settlement of 
1900 the employers agreed to accept that arrangement. 5 

The payment of helpers or assistants by the man who re- 
ceives the rate from the employer has been for years a promi- 
nent feature of the scale system of the Amalgamated Asso- 
ciation of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers. Until very recently 
it was customary in many branches of the trade for the 
roller in charge of the crew on each set of rolls to pay cer- 
tain members of the crew from his own rate, the puddler 
to pay his helper, and other workers to pay helpers when 
needed. The scale stipulations as to which of the regular 
members of the crews should be paid by the manufacturer 
and which by the roller seem to have been sufficiently ex- 
plicit and close enough to the current practice to prevent 
frequent or serious disputes. Such troubles as have arisen 

1 The snappers were not members of the organization. 

2 Report of the Convention, 1892, p. 40. 

3 Report of the Convention, 1895, pp. 32, 86, 87, 98. 

4 Report of Convention, 1896, p. 247; Report of Convention, 1899,, 
p. 97- 

6 Report of the Officers, 1900. 



The Piece Scale 63 

have usually been over the payment of extra men who had 
to be added to the crew to help on occasional lots of heavy 
work or to be employed continuously because the work had 
become permanently harder. 

When additional help was needed the employer might 
have furnished the help or increased the rate. Failure on 
the part of the employer to furnish the help required, or 
insistence that the roller should pay for it, meant a reduc- 
tion in the roller's rate, since the addition to the labor force 
at the rolls was usually needed for handling work of heavier 
sizes which did not increase the tonnage to the same extent 
that the difficulty of handling was increased. Every branch 
of the trade has had its grievances over the payment of 
additional help supplied by the employer, and these disputes 
have frequently resulted in wage scale stipulations covering 
the questions at issue. In the Pittsburgh scale of 1884, for 
example, a provision was inserted that on all mills with 
three or more sets of rolls the extra hands required should 
be paid by the company. In the 1887 scale the rule was 
added that "on all iron and steel over 160 pounds, extra 
help shall be furnished to the heater, to be paid by the com- 
pany." 1 In the same scale a clause was included providing 
that extra help shall be furnished to the muck-mill roller 
when rolling billets, and on sheet mills when rolling wide 
work. This last provision was later extended to cover 
heavy work. Clauses of this character have been gradually 
added until at the present time they make up a considerable 
part of the scale footnotes, particularly in the sheet scale. 
This development of the scale has of course been marked 
by disagreements. 2 

The union in many cases established rates to be paid by 
members to helpers who are also union members. The rate 
to be paid by the puddler to his helper was fixed in 1891 
at " one third and five per cent." of the puddler's rate. 3 

1 Pittsburgh Scale of Prices for year ending June 30, 1888. 

2 For instance, Proceedings, 1892, p. 4412 ; Proceedings, 1903, pp. 
6667, 7022; Proceedings, 1904, p. 7055. 

3 Proceedings, 1891, pp. 3274, 3324, 3353, 4221; Western Scale of 
Prices in Rolling Mills, for year ending June 30, 1892. 



64 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

The puddler frequently pays his helper more than this. 
Sometimes the two men work the furnace on equal shares. 
In 1880 an agreement was made by a joint committee of 
rollers and of roughers and catchers on sheet mills for the 
rates to be paid by the former to the latter in the Pittsburgh 
district, and inserted in the scale. 1 The wage rates of other 
workers paid by the roller have since been included in the 
scale of prices. The constitution provides the rate to be 
paid by the sheet heater to his helper, if he should employ 
one. 2 The constitution also provides rates for helpers on 
tin-plate mills. Rates to be paid by the roller to members 
of his crew on finishing mills have also been established by 
the union. 3 Many men who are not " regular " members of 
the crews in the scale sense but who are members of the 
union are employed about the rolls by the rollers, roughers, 
catchers, or heaters. Such men make their own terms with 
the members who employ them, but their rates may be in- 
creased by appeal to their local unions at the time of scale 
revision. Their wages may not be reduced during the scale 
year, and are subject to the sliding scale to the same extent 
as those of members specified in the scale. 4 

The Association's policy in recent years has been directed 
toward having all workers whose rates are specified in the 
scale paid directly by the manufacturer. The muck roller 
still pays all the workers in his crew except the "bloom 
boy," of whose wages he pays half. In sheet mills the 
roller paid the rougher and the catcher until 1905. 5 Down 

1 Pittsburgh scale, 1881-1882. 

2 Constitution, 1901, Art. XIX, sec. 3; Constitution, 1908, Art. XIX, 
sec. 3. 

3 Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and Wheeling Scales of prices, 1881-1882 ; 
Pittsburgh Scale of Prices for Rolling Mills for year ending June 30, 
1890; Western Scale of Prices, 1890-1891, scales for bar, structural, 
and 12 inch mills ; Proceedings, 1905, p. 7182. 

4 Proceedings, 1899, pp. 5565, 5620; Proceedings, 1905, p. 7366; 
Constitution, 1901, Art. XVII, sec. 22; Constitution, 1908, Art. XVII, 
sec. 21. 

5 Pittsburgh Scale of Prices, 1881-2 ; Cincinnati Scale of Prices, 
June, 1881-June, 1882; Wheeling Scale of Prices, June, 1881-June, 
1882 ; Pittsburgh. Sheet Mill Scale, in Proceedings, 1880, Appendix ; 
Amalgamated Journal, July 6, 1905 ; Western Scale of Prices, 1905-6, 
note 28 to the Sheet Mill Scale. 



The Piece Scale 65 

to 1890 many members of crews were paid by the rollers in 
the various classes of finishing mills ; since that time it has 
been exceptional for regular members of the crew to be paid 
by the roller. 1 

Ill 

Abnormally Difficult Conditions of Production 

Liability to defective or deficient materials or to the emer- 
gence of physical conditions which make production of 
goods of the proper quality abnormally difficult has raised 
issues which have been of importance in several trades. 
The establishment of rules as to when special provisions for 
payment to meet such conditions shall come into force has 
given quite as much difficulty as the decision of what is to 
be paid. Workers of molten iron and glass are especially 
hindered in securing output by poor materials, and the rules 
for the determination of when materials shall be considered 
too poor to be worked at the regular list prices have de- 
manded much attention in these trades. 

The questions as to when the molder shall be paid for bad 
castings due to " dull " iron and for molds which cannot be 
"poured off" on the same day on which they are prepared 
because of insufficient iron, and what the molder shall re- 
ceive under these circumstances, were for years trouble- 
some questions in the stove-molding trade. There was no 
general rule on these points and the practice varied 2 prior 
to the adoption of a rule in the conference of 1896 by the 
molders and the Stove Founders' National Defence Asso- 
ciation. Whenever sufficient good iron was not furnished 
to pour off the molds, except in case of unavoidable acci- 
dent, the molder was to be paid one-half the regular price 
for such work as remained over. 3 It was also agreed then 

1 Cincinnati Scale for Guide Mills, 1880-1881, in Proceedings, 1880, 
Appendix; Proceedings, 1891, pp. 2819, 3,518; Proceedings, 1893, p. 
4207; Western Scale of Prices, 1 890-1 ; .Proceedings, 1905, p. 7182. 

2 Proceedings of the Iron Molders, 1890, pp. 19, 21 ; Iron Molders' 
Journal, February, 1891, p. 4; June, 1896, p. 245. 

3 Conference Agreements, Clause 12; Iron Molders' Journal, 
April, 1896. 

5 



66 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

that payment should be made for work lost through " dull " 
iron only after the foreman's attention had been called to 
the fact that the heat was bad and he had then ordered the 
iron poured. The aim of this provision was to secure 
assurance that the iron was poor when it came from the 
cupola and that the castings had not been "lost" through 
the carelessness of individual molders in allowing the iron 
to cool. i * 

The provision adopted in 1896 with reference to insuffi- 
cient iron has remained unchanged, but the provision con- 
cerning dull iron did not work out satisfactorily to the 
Molders. In the 1903 conference they offered an amend- 
ment providing that payment should be made for all work 
lost through dull iron when the aggregate loss from this 
cause amounted to four per cent, of the value of the work 
(to the molder) poured in the same heat. This was not 
accepted by the f oundrymen. 1 The following year the union 
modified its proposal so that payment should be made when 
ten per cent, of the molders should lose five per cent, of 
their work in any one heat on account of dull iron. This 
resolution was also defeated by the employers. 2 In 1905 
the union proposed that a loss of two per cent, of the work 
measured from the standpoint of its aggregate piece prices 
should be the line of division. 3 A compromise was finally 
reached in the 1906 conference by which payment is made 
for all work lost through dull iron when the aggregate loss 
on that account amounts to four per cent, of the total price 
of the work poured in any one heat. When the aggregate 
loss is less than four per cent., but ten per cent, of the 
molders lose ten per cent, of their day's work, these men 
shall be paid for all loss in excess of four per cent. 4 

Bad glass, particularly " stony " glass, has given the Win- 
dow Glass Workers considerable trouble. A rule was early 

"Iron Molders' Journal, 1903, p. 252. 
2 Ibid., 1904, p. 241. 
8 Ibid., 1905, p. 249. 

4 Ibid., 1906, p. 225; Conference Agreements, Iron Molders and 
Stove Founders, Clause 12. 



The Piece Scale 67 

established in this union that where there was question as 
to the fitness of the glass for working this was to be referred 
for decision to the manager and the master blower, and 
their decision was to be final. If the employer ordered the 
glass worked after a decision that it was not in standard 
condition the workers were to receive a guarantee. 1 The 
present rule is that in case of dispute over poor glass the 
manager may require the glass to be worked at the regular 
list prices for glass of proper quality, unless the glass is 
" stony," in which case the manufacturer shall guarantee 
an average day's wages if he insists on having it worked. 
When a general guarantee is offered at any plant to protect 
the blower, gatherer and flattener from poor glass it may 
be accepted by the president and council of the local union, 
subject to ratification by the national president or executive 
board. Should the glass worked under the guarantee ex- 
ceed the amount guaranteed the workers are to receive the 
excess. 2 

In the trade agreements relating to glass bottle blowing 
the rule as to bad glass requires the blowers to wait two and 
one-half hours from the starting time for the glass to be 
gotten into condition for working, and to make every effort 
to get it into condition meanwhile. After the expiration of 
that time if the glass is in poor condition the members may 
go home or demand payment if they remain. If the employer 
requests them to work the glass previous to the expiration 
of that time and is willing to pay for the glass blown, the 
members may work if they wish. 3 In the machine jar and 
bottle branch there is a time limit of one and one-half hours 
for waiting for machines to be put into proper condition. 
This was formerly one-half hour. 4 

1 Report of Convention, 1884, p. 11; By-Laws, 1886, sees. 18, yj; 
Proceedings, 1895, p. 78. 

2 Wage Agreement in effect to June II, 1909. 

3 Wage Scale, 1908-9, sec. 19; Wage Scale, applying to Covered 
Pots only, 1908-9, sec. 20; Proceedings, 1907, p. 76. 

4 Proceedings, 1900, p. 41; Proceedings, 1903, p. 60; Wage Scale 
for Machine Jars and Bottles, 1908-9, sees. 4, 6, 10, 28. 



68 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

The Flint Glass Workers in 1884 adopted a resolution on 
the recommendation of the Chimney department, "that the 
blowers sustain no loss for bad or so-called stony glass 
when the manager permits or orders the men to work it." 1 
For years, however, the workers in this department com- 
plained of such losses. The employers were unwilling to 
pay for chimneys that would not pass as " seconds " and the 
men complained that the glass was sometimes so bad in a 
number of factories that " seconds " were secured with 
great difficulty. They also charged that there was too 
" close " a selection of the chimneys with which the men 
were credited and that they lost ware when the fault was 
in the glass furnished. The workers also objected to not 
having a chance to work at something else when the glass 
was bad. 2 

Poor materials, particularly coal and iron, have demanded 
attention in the puddling division of the Amalgamated Asso- 
ciation of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers. In 1877 there was 
a strike of puddlers because they had been required to fire 
their furnaces with refuse slack coal, which did not produce 
sufficient heat and greatly increased their labor. In the 
same year a strike against poor ore was brought to the atten- 
tion of the convention. 3 Grievances over poor coal and ore 
were numerous enough in the next few years 4 to induce the 
convention of 1883 to take up the question of how much 
time a puddler should spend on a heat before giving it up 
if the materials were unsatisfactory. 5 An amendment to 
the constitution was then adopted to the effect that any iron 
worked in a boiling furnace which required more than one 
and three-fourths hours to make a heat should constitute a 
grievance and should be reported as such to the employer 
or his representative. The course of action to compel better 

1 Report of Session, 1884, p. 79. 

2 Proceedings, 1887, pp. 21-22; Proceedings, 1892, p. 28; Proceed- 
ings, 1896, pp. 44-46; Proceedings, 1897, p. 29. 

3 Proceedings, 1877, PP- 46, 47- 

4 Proceedings, 1881, pp. 663-4, 668, 671, 673; Proceedings, 1882, 

p. 941. 

5 Proceedings, 1883, p. 1231. 



The Piece Scale 69 

iron if such were not given within three days was also laid 
down. 1 Later a clause was added to the scale that inferior 
coal should likewise be considered such a grievance. 2 These 
provisions did not, however, prevent misunderstanding and 
strikes on this issue. 3 

The Hatters have also had trouble at times with materials 
abnormally difficult to work. Disputes arising from this 
source have usually been settled by a change in the materials 
or an increase in price for those particular pieces. 4 Some 
protection is afforded the worker in this respect by the 
provision in the national constitution that prices must be so 
adjusted as to give an average earning capacity of at least a 
stipulated amount per week. 5 The Mule Spinners also have 
had disagreements with their employers over " stoppages " of 
the mules because of defects in the machinery or other 
causes outside the control of the spinner, and over bad 
material. 6 The Printers, too, when working under the piece 
system, provided in their scales for the compensation to be 
paid when the type furnished was defective. 7 Piece scales 
in some trades provide for the rates to be paid when men 
are given time work for a period on work of a character 
that does not easily permit of piece work. 

The turn system. — The danger to the worker of occa- 
sional reductions in his earnings because of difficult or un- 
favorable conditions for production is greatly reduced 
where the " turn " system of working and payment is fol- 
lowed. This system is a combination of piece work with a 
guaranteed wage. The worker is paid a stipulated wage 
per " turn " — usually a half -day, but in some trades a day — 
and the number of pieces he is to make per turn is specified 

1 Constitution, 1884, Art. XVIII, sec. 21. 

2 Western Scale of Prices, 1902-3. 

8 Proceedings, 1891, pp. 3517, 3518, 3528, 3534, 3545; Proceedings,. 
1902, pp. 641 1, 6437; Proceedings, 1903, pp. 6668, 6701, 6726, 6990;. 
Proceedings, 1905, p. 7399. 

4 Journal of the United Hatters, September, October, 1899; April,. 
May, 1902; January, February, 1903. 

5 Constitution, 1908, By-Laws, Art. V. 

6 Report of Convention, 1905; Report of Convention, 1906, p. 9. 
7 Barnett, p. in. 



yo Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

in the scale. If he works through the turn and fails to 
reach the stipulated number, but not through his own fault, 
he is paid his turn's wage. If the number of pieces per turn 
is fixed as a limit of output, as was originally the case, the 
failure to reach the stipulated number brings him no loss 
in average earnings. This system was once generally fol- 
lowed in most departments of the Flint Glass Workers' 
Union, in the sheet and tin division of the Iron, Steel and 
Tin Workers' Association, and in the kiln-work branch of 
the Potters. It has been given up in recent years in these 
trades, except in a few of the Flint Glass Workers' de- 
partments. 

The turn system, or " move " system, is older among flint- 
glass workers, in some branches of the trade at least, than 
the union itself. 1 Outside the Prescription department, in 
which straight piece work prevailed, the turn or "move" 
system of payment was general in the early years of the 
organization. 2 The Pressed Ware department was the first 
to break away from the system to any considerable extent. 
As a matter of fact it had not been universal in this depart- 
ment, not being in use in Pittsburgh, where the straight piece 
system had been introduced in 1878 after an unsuccessful 
strike. In 1885, after a strike in the Ohio Valley in which 
the change to the piece system was one of the issues in- 
volved, piece work was accepted in that section also. 3 

. 1 Proceedings, 1897, p. 50. 

2 A "move" is both a turn and the number of pieces to be made 
per turn. It was the system worked in the Paste Mold (including 
then Punch Tumbler and Stem Ware), Iron Mold, Pressed Ware, 
Shade and Globe and Caster Place departments (Minutes of the 
National Union, 1883; Constitution, 1 880-1). It was also worked 
for the most part in the Chimney branch, particularly in the West 
(Minutes of Session, 1883, p. 55; Report of the Convention, 1886, 
p. 92). 

3 The strike began in December, 1884, for the enforcement of the 
list adopted by the local unions of the Ohio Valley. The manufac- 
turers refused to accept this on the ground that it made their labor 
cost higher than in Pittsburgh, and demanded the piece system as 
it existed in Pittsburgh. In the settlement the piece-work system 
was accepted by the union at somewhat lower prices than _ those 
first asked (Report of Convention, 1886, pp. 10-17) • The president's 
summary of the results of the strike was as follows : " Regarded as 



The Piece Scale 7 l 

Thenceforth this department had two lists, one based on 
the turn system, the other on the piece system. 1 

The breaking down of the turn system came also through 
the removal of the limits for a turn's work as well as 
through overt changes to the piece system. When the 
"move" number, that is, the number to be done for the 
turn wage, ceased to be a fixed limit which might not be 
exceeded, the system became in essence an unlimited piece 
system. The worker turned out as many pieces per turn 
as he could, or would, and was paid for the excess above the 
move number a price per piece equal to the turn wage 
divided by the move number. As actual average wages 
grew to exceed the nominal turn wage the latter lost its 
efficiency as a guarantee of average wages. The Pressed 
Ware department gave up its limits in 1896. 2 Since that 
time most of the ware in three other turn departments, the 
Iron Mold, Paste Mold, and Stem Ware departments, has 
been put on the unlimited basis. The members cling tena- 
ciously to the turn system where it still remains. The three 
departments just mentioned are trying to retain it for the 
ware still worked under it, and the four which have pre- 
served it practically intact, the Shade and Globe, the Caster 
Place, the Electric Light Bulb, and the Chimney (hand- 
blown) departments, have repeatedly refused to give it up 
at the urgent request and even threats of their employers. 3 
Their refusal proceeds in considerable measure, of course, 
from a preference for a limited over any kind of an un- 
limited system, but it is due in large part also to a prefer- 

an effort on the part of the manufacturers to establish the piece- 
work system in the Ohio Valley, the settlement was a victory for 
the manufacturers. Regarded as a fight to crush out the union the 
settlement was a victory for the men." 

1 Report of Convention, 1886, pp. 65, 92. The limits of output 
were retained in the piece scale. In 1890 paste-mold blown tumblers 
were changed to a system of piece work with limits (Proceedings, 
1892, p. 50). 

2 Proceedings, 1897, pp. 24, 2,7. 

3 Proceedings, 1901, pp. 24, 34; Proceedings, 1903, pp. 43, 45; Pro- 
ceedings, 1904, pp. 18, 83; Proceedings, 1906, pp. 49, 142; Proceed- 
ings, 1907, pp. 4, 36, 141-2, 159; Proceedings, 1908, pp. 56, 138-142, 
152, 155-8. 



72 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

ence for a turn system as against straight piece work even 
with limits. 

The turn limits in the sheet-mill division of the Iron, 
Steel, and Tin Workers were given up in 1905. Previous 
to that year the regular members of the crew were paid a 
fixed wage per turn, except the roller who was paid by the 
ton. Some members of the crew, notably the rougher and 
the catcher, were paid by the roller, 1 and their wages per 
turn and the number of pairs to be rolled per turn were 
fixed in 1880 and inserted in the scales. 2 These same limits 
were also set for the turn's work of those members of the 
crew paid by the manufacturers. The numbers of pairs per 
turn were several times increased, and the turn wage in- 
creased proportionally. In 1905 the limits were given up 
altogether. 3 Thereafter the turn workers were practically 
on an unlimited system, and in 1908 they were put on a 
straight piece system. 4 

The turn system of the kiln workers in the pottery trade 
has also been for years an unlimited one. Kilnmen are 
still paid, however, on the basis of a fixed rate per " day " ; 
but a kilnman's day's work in the kiln is specified as a cer- 
tain number of cubic feet of ware. This day's work is 
normally exceeded in practice and a proportional rate paid 
for the excess. 5 

The members of the railway brotherhoods engaged in 
train service 6 work under a system of payment resembling 
the turn system in many respects. The wages of engineers, 
firemen, conductors, and brakemen, except those in the 
switching service, are commonly paid at mileage rates, with 
guarantees of payment for a certain number of miles per 
hour for the time worked. The rates are expressed in terms 

1 See above pp. 62-64. 

Pittsburgh Scale of Prices, 1881. 

3 Amalgamated Journal, July 6, 1905; Wage Scale, 1905-6. 

* Western Scale of Prices, 1908-9. 

"Wage Scale, 1907. 

6 These are the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, the 
Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, the Order of 
Railway Conductors, and the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen. 



The Piece Scale 73 

of cents per mile, not in hours, and for the most part, except 
in local and slow freight service, payment is in fact for 
miles actually covered. The railway unions have favored 
the system of payment by mileage and have done much to 
extend it, and they are largely responsible for the present 
form of the guarantees. 1 

The general practice is for all men in the freight-train 
service and for engineers and firemen in the passenger 
service to receive payment according to the number of miles 
covered. There are, however, two important modifications 
of this general principle. In the first place, if the miles 
covered do not reach the number agreed upon as " a day's 
run," usually one hundred, the latter is the number to be 
paid for. If a crew is sent out on the road it must be cred- 
ited with at least a day's run when released even if it has 
not covered that number of miles. The general rule is 
that crews may be released only at terminals, and must be 
released there unless sent on further in the same direction. 
Nearly all runs are from one terminal to another, except 
"turn-back" runs, that is, scheduled runs from a terminal 
to an intermediate point on the line, such as a junction, and 
back to the first terminal. 2 When a crew reaches a terminal 
and is released it receives ioo miles, even though the dis- 
tance be less than that and the time considerably under the 
number of hours agreed upon as a normal day's work. 3 If 
a crew should be sent back to the terminal from which it 
came after arriving at a terminal, it would be credited with 
two days' runs for that day.* The principle generally ob- 
served is that each time a crew leaves a terminal a dis- 

1 The engineers and firemen in particular have had to deal with 
differentiation in the mileage rates to compensate for differences in 
the difficulty of the work, and with problems growing out of defini- 
tion of work. Their policies and problems, therefore, are more those 
of piece or turn-working than of time-working unions. 

2 A " turn back run " is paid for as one continuous trip. 

3 " One hundred miles or less, or ten hours or less shall be con- 
sidered a day's work" is a common provision in the agreements. 

4 If a road has terminals which are considerably less than ioo 
miles apart it pays in a year a great deal of " constructive " mileage, 
that is, mileage not actually covered and not credited as overtime. 



74 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

tinct " day's run " begins. It often happens that men 
in this way perform many more than thirty-one "days' 
work " in a month, and it is common for men in the through 
passenger service to make two hundred miles or more on 
each day worked, resting on alternate days. The day's run 
guarantee sometimes operates to give ioo miles to a crew 
which is sent out a few miles and brought back and released 
in a very few hours. Such occurrences are, however, very 
exceptional. A supplementary rule provides that if a man 
is called and not sent out he receives payment for one- 
fourth or one-half a day and " stands first out," that is, goes 
out on the next trip not regularly assigned, and he then 
begins a new day's work. If kept under orders one-half 
a day he usually receives credit for a day's run. 

The second modification of the rule that payment is for 
mileage is the provision for "overtime." Overtime begins 
on most roads thirty-one or sixty-one minutes after the 
expiration of the number of hours agreed upon. Overtime 
is generally credited as a given number of miles; though 
sometimes it is provided for in cents per hour. The over- 
time mileage allowed in freight service, except fast freight, 
is generally equal to the number of miles in a " day's run " 
divided by the number of hours agreed upon as a day's 
work. In the fast freight and passenger service it is on 
most roads more than this — in the passenger service usually 
double — in order to bring the overtime mileage allowance 
into closer conformity with the mileage ordinarily made. 
If the mileage actually covered in overtime exceeds the 
allowance, the actual mileage is paid for. The overtime 
guarantee is important to the men in the ordinary freight 
service, as the wages received under the overtime clause 
averages on many roads nearly twenty per cent, of their 
total earnings. 

There are many cases, particularly in the passenger serv- 
ice, in which regular trips are rated separately in agreements 
which provide in general for mileage payment. These trip 
rates are calculated on a mileage basis even if the agree- 



The Piece Scale 75 

ment stipulates the amount to be paid for the trip instead 
of the number of miles to be allowed for it. Usually a 
separately stated trip rate is higher than actual mileage 
would be, and the trips are generally rated separately be- 
cause the average number of miles for the time worked can- 
not be easily made on them. 1 Passenger conductors and 
trainmen are also often paid by the month. On some roads 
they are given mileage rates and guaranteed a certain num- 
ber of miles or trips per month. In some cases daily guar- 
antees are in force. Monthly rates and individual trip 
rates, each made up separately on the basis of the time re- 
quired for the run, were once general in the railway service ; 
but the unions have steadily urged the universal use of 
mileage rates with guarantees. 

It is evident that under such a system of payment rules 
must be established as to how runs shall be assigned to 
crews. Since some assignments return more than others in 
proportion to the time worked, some rules must be adopted 
for their equitable distribution, from the standpoint of the 
men. The rule generally followed, and favored by the 
unions, is that of choice in order of seniority in the service. 
In the passenger service generally and in the freight service 
to a considerable extent, the man first in order has the 
right to a regular trip which has become vacant. In the 
freight service among the enginemen, the undesirable 
assigned regular runs are passed on to the newer men. The 
newer men are to be found on such of the regular runs 
as men above them have not cared to take, and in what is 
known as the " board list." From these positions they pass 
into the "pool" in order of seniority, if they so choose. 
The engineers in the group known as the "pool" go out 
on the unassigned runs in their turn, each man having his 
chance in order before the first man is sent out again, 
according to the rule of " first in, first out." When the 
pool is exhausted the men in the " board list " stand " first 

1 Long through passenger runs on fast trains are sometimes given 
trip rates that are less than the mileage would amount to. 



j 6 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

out" in order. The number in the pool is generally regu- 
lated so that each man in it has an opportunity to make at 
least a given mileage per month, usually in the neighborhood 
of 2600. The men in the pool have the choice in the order 
of seniority of the " preferred " runs. 

The trainmen and conductors are opposed to the regular 
assignment of the "preferred runs" in the freight service. 
Except where trains have to be regularly assigned for good 
cause they insist on the men who have attained the through- 
freight group sharing all runs on the principle of " first in, 
first out." The local-freight runs are assigned, but are 
looked upon as less desirable than through-freight runs. 
The men have the choice of passing into the through-freight 
group in order of seniority as among the engineers. The 
conductors' and trainmen's unions also favor the establish- 
ment of guarantees for the men retained in the service. 1 

There is some classification of the work in the train serv- 
ice as a basis for making differences in mileage rates similar 
to the distinctions in the rates for different varieties of prod- 
uct in other trades. The rates for engineers and firemen 
vary to some extent with the size of the engines. For 
trainmen and conductors the rates are the same for men 
of the same rank; but local freight pays more per mile, as 
the mileage made in the time worked is less. The trainmen 
and conductors want higher rates per mile when " double- 
heading" — putting on an extra engine to carry a train up 
an incline — is resorted to. Their contention is that it in- 
creases the length of the train for the trip and makes more 
work for the crew. There have been questions of definition 
of the work, too, of engineers and firemen, particularly the 
latter, as to when " work " shall begin and end. The sched- 
ule of rules covering questions of this kind makes up a 
very important part of the wage agreements of these two 
unions. 

1 It is a general rule of the railway unions that when the force is 
reduced, the men are " let out " in the reverse order to that in which 
they were taken on, and each man drops into the vacated place just 
below him. 



CHAPTER II 

THE STANDARD TIME RATE 

The prevailing method of regulating time wages in Amer- 
ican trade unions is by fixing a standard rate, that is, a rate 
binding on a group of workers. This rate in nearly all 
cases is set as a minimum and not an actual or maximum 
rate. There have, however, been instances of unions fixing 
time rates for individuals instead of for groups, and of 
unions adopting group rates which were not minimum rates. 
It will be expedient to consider these exceptional classes 
of rates before entering upon the discussion of minimum 
standard rates. 

Unions have found it feasible at times to make agree- 
ments with employers specifying the rates to be paid to 
individuals designated by name. Or a union, stopping 
short of such an agreement may fix rates for individual 
members directly, or through its officers, shop stewards or 
business agent. This has been done by the Pattern Makers, 
whose local unions are comparatively small, compact organi- 
zations. The Baltimore Coat Makers, a local union of the 
United Garment Workers, has also followed this practice 
for the lower grades of assistant operators, baisters, and 
finishers on coats, because of the difficulty of adopting and 
enforcing an equitable minimum for inexperienced workers 
of widely varying capacity. These individual demands are 
usually supported by the withdrawal of the individual 
worker so rated, if the wage is refused by the employer. 

A union may also take action affecting the wage rates of 
a number of workers without adopting a standard rate for 
the group. It may agree with the employers for a given 
absolute increase per day for all, or, as is more common, 
for a given percentage increase. If the union has heretofore 
had no standard rate a union rate is thus established for 

77 



78 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

each member by agreement. This has been done, for in- 
stance, by the textile unions of Fall River in their present 
sliding scale agreement. The wages of the members, which 
up to that time had not been to any considerable extent 
standardized, thereby come to be increased or decreased 
by a uniform percentage. Another form of action affecting 
uniformly the time rates of a group of workers occurs 
where a local union with a piece-price list provides that 
the rates to be paid time workers shall be based on their 
piece earnings. Local unions, notably among the Granite 
Cutters, have occasionally agreed with employers that each 
time worker is to be separately rated at what his work 
averages by the piece bill. Unions may enforce percentage 
advances or flat advances or may require that time wages 
shall be equivalent to piece earnings and may at the same 
time enforce standard minimum rates, as will be shown 
later. The cases noted here are peculiar in that they are 
cases in which no standard rates are fixed. 

The standard minimum rate has been long in use among 
American trade unions. The establishment of such rates 
in this country probably goes back as far as the regulation 
of time wages by unions. The New York Printers' scale 
of 1809 provided that " No journeyman working at press 
on a morning daily paper shall receive a less sum than nine 
dollars for his weekly services; nor those on an evening 
paper a less sum than eight dollars." Journeymen employed 
under the time system on composition were " in book or 
evening daily paper offices, to receive not less than eight dol- 
lars per week. On morning daily papers nine dollars." 1 

In the revival of unionism after the Civil War we find 
several unions with " standard " time rates of wages, notably 
the Bricklayers, 2 Plasterers, Carpenters, and Iron Molders. 3 

1 Barnett, pp. 367-369. 

2 MS. Proceedings, International Union of Bricklayers of North 
America, 1867, pp. 21, 37-8, 42-44; Proceedings of the Bricklayers' 
National Union of the United States, 1871, p. 27. 

3 International Journal (Iron Molders'), November, 1866; January, 
1867. 



The Standard Time Rate 79 

It is certain that these rates were in many instances not 
intended as actual or maximum rates and it appears that 
they were binding on all as minimum rates. Bricklayers' 
Union, No. I, of Missouri, adopted a resolution in 1867 
that after May first of that year no member should be 
allowed to work for less than five dollars per day. 1 The 
" rate " of the Newark Iron Molders in 1866 was the " low- 
est any can accept." 2 A correspondent wrote to the Mold- 
ers' Journal from New York in January, 1867, that the 
Bricklayers' Society rate was four dollars, but employers 
gave fifty cents a day more for good workmen, and brick- 
layers received from four to five dollars ; he also noted that 
the Plasterers' Society rate was four dollars and a half, 
but that more was paid in some instances to good workmen. 

By 1875 the use of the minimum standard rate was evi- 
dently widespread among the strong time-working trade 
unions. A writer in the Molders' Journal of August, 1874, 
defends the trade-union practice of fixing a rate of wages 
below which no member is allowed to work. This, he says, 
is the one practice charged against trade unions with which 
more than any other the employers find fault. The mini- 
mum rate, the writer affirms, is not intended to be a maxi- 
mum though the employers are inclined to make it such. 3 
In August, 1875, an article is quoted with approval in the 
same journal from the Fall River Labor Journal in defense 
of the policy of setting a minimum rate pursued by "car- 
penters, painters, mechanics, and other classes of skilled 
help." This writer also declares that the rate is intended 
as a minimum, not as a maximum. 4 

There have been some exceptions to the general rule that 
standard rates are minimum rates. Some of the local unions 
of the Granite Cutters, particularly in New England, were 
long in coming to the adoption of minimum rates. These 



'MS. Proceedings, 1867. 

2 International Journal, December, 1866, p. 286. In the Iron Mold- 
ers' Journal of July, 1899 (p. 356), the editor stated that the mini- 
mum wage is as old as the union itself. 

3 International Journal, August, 1874, p. 6. 

4 Iron Molders' Journal, August, 1875, p. 396. 



80 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

unions were at first very largely piece-working unions. For 
years "the rate" or "the standard rate" meant in many 
of the New England local unions the average or "basic" 
rate. 1 The Providence branch, for instance, had in 1880 
" standard " wages of $2.25 ; some received less than that 
amount, but it seems to have been the predominant rate 
or the presumptive rate. 2 In some places where both the 
piece system and the time system of payment were in use, 
the "standard wages" was the amount the average man 
earned by the piece bill, and so a presumptive rate as applied 
to time workers. 3 Yet the Philadelphia and the New York 
union rates were in 1881 minimum rates, though the unions 
had some difficulty in enforcing them. 4 Boston's "stand- 
ard" rate also was in 1883 a minimum rate. 5 The "stand- 
ard" rate gradually changed from what most of the men 
received or the average rate into a minimum rate. With 
the passing of the piece system in the nineties, 6 and the agi- 
tation for a national minimum rate the union rate came 
to be known as the " minimum " rate and to be in most of 
the branches an actual minimum. 7 

There were a few branches, however, which had not 
adopted minimum rates when the national minimum of three 
dollars came into force in 1900. The Barre (Vermont) 
branch was one of these which attracted much attention. In 
1900 that branch obtained a sixteen and two-thirds per cent, 
increase for all members, but not the recognition of a mini- 
mum. The competent workmen were to receive thirty-five 
cents an hour and this was known as the average rate. 
Those not up to that level of competency were to receive 
what they were worth as judged from the piece-price list, 
and the better men were to receive thirty-seven and a half 

Granite Cutters' Journal, September, December, 1878; October, 
November, December, 1879; March, April, May, August, 1880. 
2 Ibid., March, 1881. 
8 Ibid., April, 1882; September, 1891. 

4 Ibid., June, November, 1881. 

5 Ibid, May, 1883. 

6 See p. 193. 

7 Granite Cutters' Journal, March, 1897. 



The Standard Time Rate Si 

or forty cents an hour. 1 The national officers were opposed 
to " average " rates and urged the New England branches 
which had such rates, to try to secure minimum rates. 2 The 
Hardwick branch obtained a minimum instead of an " aver- 
age" rate in the spring of 1902, being the first branch in 
Vermont to do so. 3 The officers continued to urge the policy 
of the minimum rate upon the locals, 4 but Barre did not fix 
a minimum rate until 1908. 5 

There have been, and still are, local unions in many trades 
which, though favoring the policy of the minimum rate, 
have not adopted one because they are not strong enough 
to enforce a rate sufficiently high to seem worth while to 
the mass of the workers, without excluding some whose 
adherence is needed. P'or example, the Philadelphia Gar- 
ment Workers devoted their energies to building up their 
union for two years after their organization in 1897, before 
they adopted a minimum, which every member was to obtain 
when making a new contract. 6 The Granite Cutters have 
recently begun to organize the granite polishers and to take 
them into the same local unions with the cutters. They 
desire to secure minimum rates for the polishers wherever 
feasible. The Barre agreement for 1908-11, for instance, 
provides a minimum to be paid to all polishers by March 1, 
1909. In some other localities, however, minimum rates 
have not yet been adopted for the polishers. In the Quincy 
and Concord agreements for 1908-1911 a minimum rate is 
set for polishers working by the day, but it is provided that 
if any man cannot earn this rate his wages are to be fixed 

1 Granite Cutters' Journal, March, 1900, p. 4. 

2 Ibid., February, 1902, p. 4. 

3 Ibid., March, April, 1902. 

* Ibid., December, 1902 ; January, February, 1903. The lack of a 
minimum in Barre was the cause of considerable contention between 
that branch and the national officers. 

5 Ibid., February, March, 1903; January, March, May, 1908. In 
1903 the Quincy Branch asked for " a minimum of $2.90 and an 
average of $3.08." Their feeling was that the fixing of a minimum 
would allow those to obtain employment who could not secure it at 
the average (Ibid., January, 1903, p. 9). 

"Weekly Bulletin, May 13, 1904; Garment Worker, August, De- 
cember, 1898. 
6 



82 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

by a joint committee in case of dispute. The Stony Creek 
agreement for the same period provides that polishers must 
be union men and not work more than eight hours a day; 
but they are to make their own terms as to wages. 1 

The Iron Molders' Union, as has been noted, was strongly 
in favor of the minimum-rate policy from early in its his- 
tory, 2 but even in the nineties many local unions did not 
enforce minimum rates. In some places this was due to a 
decrease in the strength of local unions; 3 in others to the 
prevalence of piece work. In Boston and vicinity a mini- 
mum was established and piece work abolished in 1895. 4 
In 1899 and 1900 there was a general movement for the 
establishment of minimum rates. In 1899 St. Louis re- 
gained the minimum, 5 and in the same year minimum rates 
were established in Buffalo, 6 Springfield, Worcester, Provi- 
dence, Lowell and Bridgeport, and in other cities. 7 

I 

Rate Grouping by Kind of Work 

In the use of the time standard rate the most important 
question is as to the grouping of the members for purposes 

1 The Cutting Die and Cutter Makers have not yet adopted scales. 
The union is but a few years old and the varied character of the 
work is a difficulty in the way of setting a standard rate. There 
are occasionally instances of union time workers not subject to 
minimum rates, because of their relative fewness. In some places 
there are scattered day workers in the piece-working branches of 
such unions as the Boot and Shoe Workers, the Garment Workers, 
and the Cloth Hat and Cap Makers for whom no minimum day rates 
have been adopted. Some time-working unions have a few members 
in auxiliary branches of the trade, as the felters in the Print Cutters' 
Union, and the stone grinders in the Lithographers' Union for whom 
they have not thought it necessary to adopt rates. 

2 See above, p. 79; also Proceedings, 1888, pp. 23, 78; Iron Molders' 
Journal, April, 1890, p. 6. 

8 In 1900 Toledo was reported as disorganized, and with wages 
there the worst in the state. In 1884 Toledo had a minimum of 
$2.75 (Iron Molders' Journal, March, 1900, p. 143). 

4 Ibid., January, 1896, p. 12. 

6 Ibid., May, 1899, p, 231. 

6 Ibid., March, November, 1899. 

7 Ibid., 1899, pp. 348, 64&-50. For accounts of the general move- 
ment, Ibid., 1899, pp. 175, 407, 459, 463, 587; 1900, pp. 341, 403-4, 
467, 470, 535; 1 901, PP. 483, 485, 76o, 763; Proceedings, 1899, pp. 8, 
27, 29, 30. 



The Standard Time Rate 83 

of uniform minimum rating. As has been pointed out in the 
Introduction, the line of demarcation between groups sub- 
ject to different minimum rates has nearly always to do 
with the kind of work the members are performing, not 
with the degree of competency shown in doing work of the 
same kind. In many trades there are two or more separate 
kinds of work which are recognized as constituting distinct 
branches or subdivisions of the trade or craft, each in itself 
the special, and for the most part exclusive, occupation of 
those who follow it. 1 Where there are such occupational 
groups within the membership of a union — and in most time- 
working trades there are at least two, and often several — 
the general union policy is to establish different minimum 
rates for groups recognized as requiring different grades 
of skill. 

The differences in occupation within the membership of 
a union are often wider than those within what may be con- 
sidered a trade or craft. Some unions, the so-called " indus- 
trial" unions, include workmen of several trades within 
their membership. The Brewery Workmen, for instance, 
admit to membership the engineers, firemen, coopers, team- 
sters, and stablemen employed by the breweries as well as 
the workers actually engaged in making, bottling, and other- 
wise preparing the product for shipment. The engineers, 
firemen, coopers, teamsters, and stablemen are not special- 
ized brewery workmen; nearly all could pass from the 
brewery to employment in other industries without change 
of occupation. The United Mine Workers is another union 
of this type. The Illinois miners' " top day wage scale " 
includes rates for carpenters, blacksmiths, dynamo men, 
firemen, engine coalers, and engineers, all workers in occu- 
pations distinct from mining. The Longshoremen, Marine 
and Transport Workers' Association includes not only men 

1 If any considerable part of the workmen in a trade are engaged 
on work that they are expected to perform regularly, and which 
other members are not expected to do, save perhaps on exceptional 
occasions, they may be regarded as engaged on a " distinct " kind 
of work in the sense in which that term is here used. 



84 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

engaged in loading and unloading vessels on the Great 
Lakes, together with engineers, firemen and hoisters en- 
gaged on machinery for loading and unloading, but also 
steam shovel and dredgemen, dredge workers, drill-boat 
workers, tugmen, tug firemen and linemen, gill-net fisher- 
men and fish packers. In such unions as these, the question 
of rating naturally resolves itself at the outset into a sepa- 
rate determination for each of the distinct trades. 

Many unions are composed of the members of trades 
which have been much subdivided in recent years in conse- 
quence of advances in productive methods. The Garment 
Workers, Ladies' Garment Workers, Boot and Shoe Work- 
ers, Bookbinders, and Laundry Workers, are conspicuous 
examples of this class. 1 In each of these trades there are 
subdivisions which require no common apprenticeship, and 
from one to another of which workers do not ordinarily 
pass. Each of these subdivisions is virtually a distinct trade 
or craft from the standpoint of wage rating and is recog- 
nized as such by the unions. 

There are other unions which, while made up very largely 
of workmen of one trade, include some members of another 
trade whose work is closely conected with that of the major 
trade. The tool sharpeners, who are members of the Gran- 
ite Cutters' Union, are specialized blacksmiths ; the machine 
tenders in the Typographical Union are specialized machin- 
ists. Where such workers are skilled and comparatively 
few in number, as in these cases, the tendency is to give them 
the same rate as other members of the union if it can be 
secured for them. Some crafts practically distinct in large 
places, but followed to a considerable extent by the same 
persons in the smaller cities and towns are joined in the 
same union, such as the bricklayers, masons and plaster- 

1 The two garment-working unions and the Boot and Shoe Work- 
ers are predominantly piece-working unions. In many places, how- 
ever, they have to maintain minimum time rates for various divisions 
of their trades. The Textile Workers, also a predominantly piece- 
working union, includes within its membership several distinct occu- 
pations remunerated under the time system; but these are for the 
most part not subdivisions of what was formerly a single craft. 



The Standard Time Rate 85 

ers, 1 the plumbers and gas fitters, and the paper hangers 
and painters. In the large cities each craft in such a union 
has its distinct minimum rate. In the smaller places, par- 
ticularly if there is much interchanging, the rate is likely 
to be the same for both. 2 

There are several unions in the building trades which, as 
a result of specialization and the introduction of machinery, 
include groups of members who work at a lower rate per 
hour than the general rate for the men on the buildings. 
One class of these are the " inside " men employed in shops 
in the preparation of materials, as the shopmen of the Struc- 
tural Iron Workers, the shopmen in the Operative Plaster- 
ers' Association, and the cabinet makers and other millmen 
in the Carpenters and Joiners. 3 Another important case in 
point is that of the men engaged in yards in preparing stone. 
The marble bed-rubbers, sawyers, and polishers in New 
York City have separate minimum rates differing from each 
other and lower than the rate for cutters and setters. The 

1 There is a distinct union of plasterers, the International Asso- 
ciation of Operative Plasterers, with branches in most cities of con- 
siderable size. Where there are no Operative Plasterers' local 
unions, men who do plastering belong to the Bricklayers and Masons' 
Union. 

2 Sometimes the inclusion of two branches of a craft or two dis- 
tinct crafts in the same union leads to the fixing of the same rate 
for both, whereas if separate unions were maintained one would be 
likely to get less than the other. In these cases there is a feeling 
among the members of the branch which would receive less pay 
that the effort or skill required is equal to that in the other branch 
and that a strong union is alone necessary to secure equal com- 
pensation. In 1903 the core makers who had been previously organ- 
ized in a separate union, were taken into the Iron Molders' Union. 
At that time their rates were in most places lower than those of the 
molders, and for a time a lower rate was set for them in the mold- 
ers' union (Iron Molders' Journal, 1904, pp. 99, 147, 251, 486, 518, 
599). The core makers still have lower rates in most places. In 
the New York district, for instance, their rate is twenty-five cents 
a day less than the molders' rate (Ibid., January, 1907, p. 48). At 
the 1907 convention of the Iron Molders, however, it was declared 
to be the policy of the union to secure for them the same rate as 
for the molders. This policy was adopted on the ground that the 
core makers deserve as high wages as the molders and failed to 
secure equal wages before only because they were not well organized. 

3 A separate union of cabinet makers and other wood workers, 
known as the Amalgamated Wood Workers, is now in process of 
consolidation with the Carpenters and Joiners. 



86 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

polishers in the Granite Cutters' Union also, as has been 
noted, have a lower rate than the cutters. In all of these 
cases the separate rates are for divisions of the trade which 
are regarded as distinct occupations for those now engaged 
in them, and from which they are not ordinarily expected to 
pass to the higher-rated division. 1 In those unions to which 
helpers are admitted, as the Asbestos Workers, Blacksmiths, 
Boiler Makers and Iron Shipbuilders, Cement Workers, 
Elevator Constructors, Electrical Workers, Bridge and 
Structural Iron Workers, Marble Workers, Plumbers and 
Gas Fitters, Steam Fitters, and Tile Layers, the rates for 
helpers are, of course, lower than for journeymen. 

Finally, there are unions which maintain distinct minimum 
rates for groups of workers divided according to the stages 
of advancement which they have reached in the trade. The 
International Printing Pressmen's Union is such a union. 
Outside the large newspaper offices the apprentice on becom- 
ing a journeyman and being given charge of a press is 
entitled to the lowest minimum rate set for journeymen. 
As he advances in skill he is normally promoted to a larger 
press. The union rate for journeymen varies with the kind 
of presses of which they have charge, or, on the largest 
presses, with the position held on the press. In the large 
newspaper offices the positions on the presses are generally 
rated, and assistant pressmen on these are regarded prac- 
tically as journeymen and given as high rates as men in 
charge of smaller presses in book and job offices. 2 Men 

1 There are, of course, many other unions made up of workers 
following branches of what was once a single trade or of workers 
in allied trades carried on in close conjunction, which maintain, in 
many places at least, two or more separate rates of wages. Among 
these unions are the Bakers, Carriage and Wagon Workers, Cloth 
Hat and Cap Workers, Car Workers, Electrical Workers, Amalga- 
mated Glass Workers, Glove Workers, Hotel and Restaurant Em- 
ployees, Machine Printers and Color Mixers, Metal Polishers, Buf- 
fers, and Platers, Pavers and Rammermen, Photo-Engravers, Rail- 
way Carmen, Seamen, Theatrical Stage Employees, Stereotypers 
and Electrotypers, Teamsters, and Wood, Wire and Metal Lathers. 

2 There has been a tendency recently to group the assistants on 
these presses as journeymen at one rate, instead of distinguishing 
between them in rating, leaving the pressmen in charge with a rate 
higher than the assistants' rate. 



The Standard Time Rate 87 

who have learned to run presses in the smaller book and 
job offices often transfer to the more highly paid newspaper 
or magazine presses. The Lithographers also fix a series 
of rates of wide range for their members in charge of 
presses, according to the size of the press. The Machine 
Printers' rates for printing wall paper vary in similar fash- 
ion with the number of colors printed. 

There are many other instances of differentiation in rates 
within a union according to degree of proficiency. Among 
the Garment Workers, coat operators, baisters, finishers, and 
pressers are rated according to the work on which they are 
generally engaged. The Bookbinders, Bakers, Marine Cooks 
and Stewards (of the Seamen's Union), Seamen, Steam 
Engineers, Laundry Workers, and the Pavers and Ram- 
mermen maintain distinct rates for different positions which 
mark the stages of advancement attained by the worker. 
The rates of the Compressed Air Workers vary according 
to the pounds of pressure under which the work is done. 
This is partly a matter of physical strength, but also a 
matter of experience in more difficult work. 

There are also unions which set higher rates for groups 
of men who have specialized on work which is above the 
skill of the ordinary journeyman. For example, tool makers 
and die-sinkers are general machinists with special training 
in these higher classes of work. Their rate is usually fifty 
cents a day more than the rate for " competent machinists.'* 
The linotype operators are generally recognized as men of 
more skill as a class than other members of the Typo- 
graphical Union and in many places have a higher rate. 
Similar cases are those of the decorators in the Brotherhood 
of Painters and Decorators, the "molders" in the Stereo- 
typers' and Electrotypers' Union, the carvers in the Granite 
Cutters' and Marble Workers' Unions, sewer-builders in the 
Bricklayers' Union, and mortar makers and cement mixers 
in the Hod Carriers' and Building Laborers' Union. In 
some trades, too, foremen and men " in charge of gangs " 
are given higher minimum rates. In nearly all of these 



88 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

unions the higher-rated men are in the same unions with 
the members following the common branch of the trade. 
Where men are not separately rated, although engaged reg- 
ularly on work recognized as requiring more skill than is 
expected of the average journeyman, it is usually because 
these men are comparatively few in number, or do not feel 
the need of a higher union rate to secure higher wages, or 
because the union does not wish the work to be assigned 
to a specialized class of workmen. 

Sometimes a distinction is made in the minimum rate for 
other reasons than differences in trade skill. The Granite 
Cutters have a higher rate for outside work than for work 
done under shelter, to compensate for the exposure and 
greater lack of regularity in the former. Men working on 
surface machines are also usually given higher rates in this 
union, not because the work requires greater than average 
skill but on account of the exposure to the fine dust. The 
Granite Cutters often set lower rates, too, for monumental 
work than for work on buildings, on the ground that at an 
equal rate with the building rate, other material, particularly 
marble, would be substituted for granite and the members 
lose the chance to do this work. The Stone Cutters have 
had at times a lower rate for limestone for a similar reason. 1 
Sometimes men in the building trades, particularly brick- 
layers and carpenters, are allowed by their local unions to 
take special yearly jobs at rates that amount to less per day 
than the union minimum. These are usually positions with 
corporations with large establishments which do their own 
repair work and undertake no building contracts. These 
positions are exempted from the regular daily rate because 
the work is not done in competition with contractors in the 
trade and because the men earn more in the year than mem- 
bers at the minimum. 

There are some cases in which a differentiation in rating 
once accepted by the union is now opposed. The Black- 
smiths in large specialty shops, and particularly in railroad 

1 Stone Cutters' Journal, April, 1895 ; March, 1904. 



The Standard Time Rate 89 

shops, often have a series of separate rates for journeymen 
according to the kind of work done. For the general con- 
tract shops there is in many places a minimum for the ma- 
jority of the workers, with higher rates for men engaged at 
the " big fire " and in spring making, and for hammermen. 
The officers of the union favor the latter form of scale. 
They think that men at the " big fire " and at spring making 
should receive higher rates because the work requires more 
skill and that hammermen should receive more than the gen- 
eral run of journeymen because the work is harder. But 
they oppose distinctions in union rates for journeymen at 
the other fires, on the ground that the work requires on the 
whole about the same skill for all. 1 They believe that a uni- 
form minimum checks specialization, which they look upon as 
undesirable. It is highly probable that the greater conveni- 
ence in bargaining and enforcing, and the greater solidarity 
of interest engendered by a single rate, also makes the 
uniform minimum attractive to the unions. The Painters 
also oppose differentiation in rates in the railroad shops. 
The Boiler Makers favor uniform minimum rates for all 
journeymen, but there are still some local unions with sepa- 
rate minimum rates for different classes of work. Until 
recently the Wood Workers undertook to organize the men 
in mills making doors, sash and trim, and fixtures, and 
this union set separate rates for men engaged on different 
kinds of wood-working machinery, and a higher rate for 
bench men. The Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners, 
which for years has had some millmen in its membership 
and is absorbing the Wood Workers, favors the plan of 
having a single minimum rate for all millmen. 

The Machinists follow the same policy in fixing minimum 
rates for "specialists." These are workmen whose work 
is limited to tending a semi-automatic machine of a par- 
ticular kind or to executing a single kind of work on a lathe, 
milling-machine, slotting-machine, planer, or other machine 

1 The Blacksmiths were not strongly organized in these shops 
until a few years ago. 



90 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

on which a variety of work may be done. Until very re- 
cently they were denied membership in the Machinists' As- 
sociation on the ground that they were not journeymen 
machinists. With improvements in machinery, more and 
more of the journeyman's work has been taken by "special- 
ists," particularly in the large specialty shops in the East. 1 
The officers of the Machinists' Union became convinced 
that the union was losing control of an increasingly large 
part of their trade, and urged that " specialists " should be 
admitted. 2 This was done in 1903. 3 Many locals, how- 
ever, particularly in the West, where "specialists" are not 
so numerous and their competition not so threatening, have 
not attempted to organize them. 4 Where they are organ- 
ized, it is the union's policy to set a single minimum rate 
for all, but in many places distinctions in rates which had 
grown up before they were organized have been retained. 
This is especially true in the railroad shops. 5 

Questions relating to the grouping of members for wage 
rating have been more discussed among the Iron Molders 
in recent years than in any other American trade union. A 
somewhat detailed consideration of their policies in this 
respect will illustrate the considerations which prevail in 
determining the policy of a strong union. The Iron Molders 
for several years have worked for the abolition of the dif- 
ferential, in force in some sections, between the minimum 
rate for bench molders and that for floor molders. This 
distinction rested upon the assumption that work molded 
on the bench, as it was smaller, required less skill and exer- 
tion. The 1899 convention, however, declared it to be the 
policy of the union to secure the same rate for bench as for 
floor molding and urged that every effort be made to bring 

1 A national official stated to the writer that in one shop there are 
at least 2,000 specialists and not more than 300 journeymen. 

2 Machinists' Monthly Journal, 1003, pp. 256, 276, 484, 493. 

3 Proceedings, 1903, in Machinists' Journal, July, 1903, pp. 552-5 \ 
Constitution, 1903, Art. XXIV; Constitution, 1905, Art. I, sec. 1. 

4 Proceedings, 1907, p. 103. 

5 In some railroad shops the Machinists have until very recently 
had more than one rate even for journeymen, according to the 
kind of work done. 



The Standard Time Rate 91 

the former rate up to the level of the latter. 1 From 1900 
to 1904 2 the propriety of the differential was a prominent 
subject of discussion in the series of conferences between 
the Iron Molders and the representatives of the National 
Founders' Association. The employers wished to make pro- 
vision for a lower rate for bench molding in the proposed 
agreement, but the Molders opposed the extension or the 
recognition of the differential. This disagreement devel- 
oped as early as the conference of June, 1900. 3 In April, 
1902, the employers suggested that the differential should 
be made a part of the agreement, 4 and in October of the 
same year repeated the request, stating that their member- 
ship was " practically unanimous " on this point. 5 

The Molders maintained that the differential never should 
have existed, as bench work was on the whole worth as 
much as floor work, especially in machinery and jobbing 
foundries, which were the foundries to which the agree- 
ment was to apply. They argued, too, that the differential 
had been granted in only a few cities and would be an inno- 
vation in the great majority of places. At a conference 

1 Proceedings, 1899, pp. 82, 103, 107. 

2 Conferences between representatives of the Iron Molders' Union 
and the National Founders' Association continued from 1899 until 
1904. It was hoped that a general conciliation agreement which had 
been entered into would pave the way to an agreement governing 
such matters as apprenticeship, hours of labor, regulation of output, 
and wage rates, similar to that existing in the stove trade (Iron 
Molders' Journal, 1899, pp. 157, 286, 302). In May, 1899, the joint 
arbitration committee, which had been provided in the conciliation 
agreement made in March preceding, met to adjust the difficulties 
between the molders and their employers in Worcester and Provi- 
dence, where the molders had gone out on strike for the establish- 
ment of a minimum rate. The committee disagreed on the question 
of the recognition of a minimum rate. Another joint conference 
was then called (Ibid., 1899, p. 349). Throughout the whole series 
of conferences, the minimum wage was one of the chief subjects of 
discussion and the chief source of disagreement. Although it ap- 
peared at times that the two sides were close to an agreement pro- 
viding for a national settlement of wages and conditions of em- 
ployment, the minimum wage proved an insuperable obstacle. 

3 MS. Minutes of Joint Conference Committee, N.F.A. and I.M.U., 
Detroit, June, 1900. 

4 Iron Molders' Journal, 1902, p. 201. 

5 MS. Minutes of the National Conference between the N.F.A. 
and I.M.U., Detroit, October, 1902. 



92 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

held in the following February the Molders produced sta- 
tistics to support this contention. 1 They also expressed the 
fear that if the differential were granted the employers 
would put work on the bench that had formerly been done 
on the floor and declared that this has been done where the 
differential was in force. In this conference of February, 

1903, the employers merged the claim for a lower rate for 
bench molders with claims for lower rates for less compe- 
tent members, and in payment for plainer work, and it was 
not further discussed as an independent differential. The 
union has persisted in the policy of abolishing the differ- 
ential where possible, and in many places has accomplished 
its purpose. 2 In January, 1907, the business agent of the 
New York local union reported that after several years of 
contention the rate for bench men had been raised to that 
of the floor men in the New York district, embracing 
Brooklyn and Jersey City as well as New York City proper, 
and including 53 shops and 1500 men. 3 There are, how- 
ever, many places in which the difference in the rates still 
exists. 4 

The manufacturers also vainly endeavored from the out- 
set to secure a lower rate for men engaged on the plainer 
work. 5 An editorial in the Journal of July, 1899, expressed 

*MS. Minutes of the National Conference, N.F.A. and I.M.U., 
February, 1903. The Molders' figures were for all places in which 
there were local unions and covered machinery and jobbing and 
hardware foundries. Of 304 localities including 1,907 foundries and 
31,362 molders, of whom 6,352 were bench molders, 2,044 bench 
molders in 61 localities were subject to a lower rate than floor 
molders. The differential was more frequently used in New York, 
New Jersey, and the North Central States. According to informa- 
tion furnished by the National Founders' Association in 1904, sepa- 
rate minimum rates for bench and floor molders prevailed in 23 
cities out of 11 1 given (Bulletin of the Bureau of Labor, March, 

1904, p. 435). 

2 Iron Molders' Journal, 1904, p. 344; March, April, May, 1907; 
Constitution, 1907, Resolutions, No. 27. 

3 Iron Molders' Journal, January, p. 48, March, 1907. 

4 Ibid., January, February, April, May, 1907 ; Proceedings, 1907, 
PP. 56, 117. 

5 The employers' proposal was discussed at times as a lower rate 
for coarser work, at other times as a lower rate for less skilled 
men. The union representatives steadily refused to agree to allow 
a lower rate for coarser work, to recognize a lower rate class in any 



The Standard Time Rate 93 

the union opinion that any grading of the members in the 
same foundry according to the work they do would prove 
impracticable in machinery and jobbing foundries, though 
it might work in specialty shops. The lines of demarcation 
would be difficult to fix, and work and wages would tend to 
gravitate to the lowest grades, as had been the case where 
there was a difference between bench and floor rates. In 
April, 1901, the editor of the Iron Holders' Journal, though 
admitting that there is some work in all foundries that does 
not require a high degree of skill, defended the union's re- 
fusal to accept a lower rate therefor, on the grounds that 
such a plan was impracticable, and that the output demanded 
on plainer work was greater. The union representatives in 
the conference of October, 1902, admitted that some con- 
cession ought to be made in the rate for plainer work in 
some foundries, but would agree to no general wage differ- 
ential, preferring to deal with each case on its merits. 1 In 
the February, 1903, conference they again maintained that 

foundry or to surrender the coarse work to men not members of 
the union (Iron Molders' Journal, 1899, pp. 356, 643; 1901, p. 213; 
1902, p. 284; MS. Minutes of the Conference, February, 1903). In 
the final conference held in April, 1904, the employers proposed that 
men on coarse work should be allowed to make their own agreements 
as to wages with their employers free from any union minimum. 
The union representatives refused even to consider this (MS. 
Minutes of Conference, April, 1904). 

1 In March, 1901, an agreement was made by the local union of 
molders in Philadelphia and the members of the N.F.A. in that city 
which contained the following clause : " There being in some foun- 
dries a grade of work calling for less skill than is required by the 
ordinary molder — this grade of work being limited in quantity — it 
is agreed that nothing in this agreement shall be construed as pro- 
hibiting the foundrymen from employing a molder to make such 
work and paying for the same at a rate that may be mutually agreed 
upon between the molder and the foundryman. It is understood 
that a molder who is working for and receiving a rate of wages of 
twenty-seven and one-half cents per hour, or over, is not to be 
asked or expected to make the grade of work referred to above 
for any less wage rate than he is regularly entitled to under this 
agreement. This does not give the molder the right to refuse to 
make the work if it is offered to him at his regular wage rate." 
The union refused to admit this case as a precedent, regarding it 
as an agreement made under peculiar circumstances (Iron Molders' 
Journal, July, 1902, p. 47,5). As noted above, the Molders in the 
conference of April, 1904, refused a proposal to make this settlement 
general. 



94 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

in the machinery and jobbing foundries there were not such 
quantities of low-grade work as to justify a general lower 
rate. 1 

. Throughout the series of conferences with the National 
Founders' Association the Molders from the first showed 
themselves willing to consider the establishment of different 
rates for different classes of foundries, 2 although unwilling 
to agree to the establishment of different rates in the same 
foundry. 

II 

Rate Grouping by Competency 

The suggestion has often been made to time-working 
unions that instead of setting a single rate for all men en- 
gaged in the same kind of work they should divide their 
members into classes on the basis of competency and fix a 
separate rate for each class. Nearly all important time- 
working unions have at some time or other faced a proposal 
of this kind emanating from the employers or from its own 
members. The employers have urged that such a plan 

1 This position was reaffirmed in May, 1904 (Iron Molders' Journal, 
1904, p. 317). The union has in some places recently adopted lower 
rates for men employed on molding machines. These men are rec- 
ognized as not being of journeyman status, and the kind of work 
on which they are engaged is clearly differentiated. 

2 Iron Holders' Journal, July, 1899, p. 349. In the Cleveland con- 
ference of March, 1901, a resolution was adopted embodying the 
points on which agreement had been reached. It recited that there 
was a disposition on each side to favor the establishment by joint 
agreement of equitable wage rates for " different kinds of molding." 
It was explained that the intent of this provision was that a rate in 
any locality need not apply uniformly to such subdivisions of the in- 
dustry as a malleable iron foundry and a machinery foundry, but that 
such subdivisions might properly be placed on a different basis as to 
wage rates (Ibid., April, 1901, p. 191). In the Detroit conference 
of 1902 a resolution was adopted looking toward a general agree- 
ment, national in its scope, " for each class of foundries." An 
agreement was discussed for machinery and jobbing foundries. 
There are instances of differential rates being set by the molders 
for different classes of shops. There were two rates in Erie, Pa., 
for instance, in 1902; the rate for machinery and jobbing foundries 
being higher (Ibid., June, 1902, p. 384). A lower minimum rate has 
been set by some local unions for railroad shops, in which the 
molders are usually on plain work of a special character. Most of 
the molders in railroad shops, however, work by the piece. 



The Standard Time Rate 95 

would remove the chief defect in the minimum rate, that is, 
the necessity which the employer is under of paying the less 
competent men the same rate as the good, average man. 
Within the unions the proposal has been advocated on the 
ground that it will allow the less proficient members to 
obtain work and at the same time make it possible to main- 
tain a high minimum for the better men. This policy in 
rating has naturally been most strongly urged upon those 
unions in which the differences in efficiency among members 
doing the same work are very large, a circumstance which 
throws into greater relief the fact that a large number of 
men of varying competency are subject to the same mini- 
mum rate. 

The classification of men on the basis of differences in 
competency has not, however, commended itself generally 
to the unions. Very few unions now look upon this method 
of rating with favor or are willing to adopt it except as a 
temporary expedient. Many of the important time-working 
unions have had experience with the plan and nearly all of 
these have fought for its abolition, in nearly all cases with 
success. Yet at least two unions in the building trades — 
the Lathers and the Wood Carvers — still accept it as an 
unobjectionable method of wage regulation. 

In many cities the wood lathers are divided into two 
classes with separate minimum rates on the basis of the 
number of laths the workman ordinarily puts on in a day. 1 
In Chicago, for instance, a lather who puts on no more than 
fifteen hundred laths a day is rated as of the " second class," 
and those who regularly exceed that number as " first class " 
lathers. 2 The rate for the first class men is usually from 
fifteen to twenty-five per cent, higher than for the second 
class. The reason given by the officers of the national union 
for the continuance of the system is that it allows the poorer 
men to obtain employment. They state that " speed counts 
for nearly everything in wood lathing,'' and therefore the 

1 Proceedings of the Wood, Wire, and Metal Lathers, 1907, pp. 75, 
112. 

2 Ibid., p. 114. 



g6 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

slower men could not secure regular employment at a mini- 
mum rate that would be a fair rate for most of the mem- 
bers. 1 The men are usually assigned to their class by a 
committee of the local union. 

The Wood Carvers divide their members into four classes 
according to competency. As a rule each member is allowed 
to choose his rate class in the first instance according to his 
own judgment of his competency. The shop delegate knows 
the work of the men in his shop and cases of underrating 
can be corrected by the local union. The secretary of the 
national union estimates that at least eighty per cent, of the 
members of a local union are in one class. 2 

Local unions in other trades have occasionally found it 
good policy to divide their members into two or three classes 
according to competency. When a union is first established 
in a locality or when a large plant is unionized the local 
union may find the new members grouped into two or three 
or even more fairly distinct wage classes. If the members 
have been working under the piece system there may be a 
considerable divergence in wages, particularly if the work 
is not highly skilled. 3 Under these circumstances it is diffi- 
cult to find one rate that will be satisfactory as a minimum. 
The adoption of a single minimum if high would exclude 
the less capable men, and probably make it impossible to 
secure a wage agreement with the employer; a single low 
minimum would not be of much support to the men of 
higher earning capacity. Rather than take either of these 
courses local unions have in many cases preferred to estab- 
lish two or three rates of wages. In such cases, however, 
the local union expects to eliminate the lower rate as soon 

1 The wood lathers also have piece scales and in many of the 
smaller cities the piece system is still the prevailing mode of pay- 
ment. 

2 In New York the rates for the different classes in 1908 were 
$5.00, $4.50, $4.25, and $3.75. The majority of the men were in the 
$4.25 class. 

3 A case in point is the classification in the Machinists' Union of 
" specialists " who have been working under the piece system in 
large specialty shops. 



The Standard Time Rate 97 

as possible, and it is usually urged to do this by the na- 
tional union. 

The general rejection by the unions of the system of grad- 
ing members for wage rating proceeds from the belief that 
it tends to reduce wages through the competition of the more 
poorly paid with the better paid workmen. It has usually 
been found extremely difficult to assign members to their 
grades so exactly as to insure that some men shall not be 
given a lower rate by the union than the general run of 
members of the same capacity are receiving and are re- 
quired to demand. It is difficult, too, to insure that men 
of lower grades shall be transferred to a higher grade when 
their competency rises above that of their grade. The 
unions consider it a further objection that the maintenance 
of a rate or rates below the point at which a single mini- 
mum would be set makes for the retention in the trade of 
a class of inefficient or partially trained workmen. 

The history of grading systems among the Stone Cutters 
illustrates the difficulties inherent in most trades in the work- 
ing of such systems. The Stone Cutters at one time made 
wide use of the system of classifying men according to com- 
petency and setting a separate minimum rate for each grade. 
In the early nineties many local unions had more than one 
rate of wages for the same kind of work. 1 The minimum 
was practically a maximum for all but their first-class men 
and very few of these received more than the minimum 
rate for their class. In many cases it was the expectation 
of the local union that those below the first class would be 
in the minority. In New York, for instance, where the 
system was introduced in 1896, second and third class rates 
were adopted so that stone cutters of less than average 
ability who could not command the current rate might ob- 
tain employment, but all " practical" stone cutters were 
expected to be in the first class. 2 The common practice 

1 Stone Cutters' Circular, November, 1890; January, 1891 ; Stone 
Cutters' Journal, February, May, July, October, 1893; February, 
1895; February, May, October, 1899. 

2 Ibid., February, 1898, p. 10. The rates were $4.50, $4.00 and $3.50 
(Ibid., November, 1897). 



98 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

seems to have been to allow the member to classify himself, 
subject to correction by the union. Often the member's 
class was marked on his union membership card. The con- 
stitution of the Buffalo local union in 1894 provided, " No 
member will be allowed to work for second rate of wages 
when the majority in his shop, together with the shop 
steward, decide that he is worth first rate, and any em- 
ployer offering such a man second rate shall be dealt with 
as the association thinks proper." 1 The New York union 
required every employer to have at least one-third of his 
men in the first class and as many second class men as third 
class men. 2 

From about 1895 opposition to the plan of having "more 
than one rate of wages" steadily increased in the national 
union. At the time that New York adopted the three-rate 
system other local unions were reducing the number of 
classes from three to two or insisting on a single minimum 
rate. 3 The chief ground of opposition was that men would 
work for less wages than their work warranted in compari- 
son with that of their fellows. There was complaint that 
second grade men did more work in proportion to their pay 
than first grade men, and there was a tendency to limit the 
amount of work that second and third class men should be 
allowed to turn out. It was also charged that the system 
created jealousy and dissension in the membership. 4 In 
November, 1899, a member of the national executive board 
urged that advantage should be taken of the approaching 
revision of the constitution to abolish the "two rate of 
wages " system. He argued that every workman competent 
enough to be admitted to the union was a first class work- 
man and that the local unions should base their rates on 

1 Stone Cutters' Journal, July, 1894, p. n. The wages of first class 
men were to be not less than forty-four cents per hour; of second 
class men, not less than thirty-eight cents. There were about as 
many men in the second class as in the first (Ibid., April, 1895). 

2 Ibid., June, 1902, p. 12. 

3 Ibid., February, March, April, 1895. 

4 Ibid., February, 1898; November, 1899; January, 1900, Supple- 
ment, p. 10. 



The Standard Time Rate . 99 

the assumption that every union member was a first class 
workman. When the constitution was revised in 1900 a 
clause was inserted that "this Association thoroughly dis- 
courages the principle of more than one rate of wages." 1 
Although some local unions continued to follow the plan 
for several years its practical abolition has been secured. 2 

As early as 1887 the national executive board of the Car- 
penters declared their disapproval of the system of rating 
according to competency. 3 In the following year the secre- 
tary of the union called the attention of the convention to 
the importance of defining its position on the subject. 4 The 
policy of the national union was set forth by the convention 
in the following resolution, which was adopted and inserted 
in the general laws : " We are opposed to any system of grad- 
ing wages in the local unions, as we deem the same demor- 
alizing to the trade, and a further incentive to reckless com- 
petition, having the ultimate tendency when work is scarce, 
to allow first class men to offer their labor at third class 
prices. We hold that the plan of fixing a minimum price 
for a day's work to be the safest and best, and let the em- 
ployers grade the wages above that minimum." 5 Minimum 
rates graded according to competency are found even now 
among the Carpenters, but practically all of these occur in 

1 Stone Cutters' Journal, January, 1900, Supplement, p. 22 ; Consti- 
tution, 1900, Art. XXXIII. Article XXXI in the 1907 Constitution 
reads " No Branch to be allowed to have more than one rate of 
wages." Stone Cutters' Journal, May, 1900; April, May, September, 
1902; August, 1903; Proceedings, 1906 (in Supplement to Journal) x 
P- 37. 

2 Stone Cutters' Journal, March, 1901 ; February, April, October, 
1902; February, 1904, p. 19. In New York City the three-rate sys- 
tem is still in vogue. The national officers and the secretary of the 
New York local union explain that the organization there is weak, 
and is obliged to follow the three-rate system because this system 
is maintained by the Journeyman Stone Cutters' Society, a rival 
organization not connected with the Journeyman Stone Cutters' Asso- 
ciation of North America. The latter is affiliated with the Amer- 
ican Federation of Labor and is the organization referred to here 
as the Stone Cutters. 

3 The Carpenters' national union was organized in 1881. 

4 Proceedings, 1888, p. 20. 

8 Constitution, 1888, General Laws, p. 30. 



ioo Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

new or weak local unions, and the lower rates are eliminated 
as soon as possible. 1 

The Painters and Paperhangers are also opposed to 
graded scales. The 1898 constitution provided that the gen- 
eral executive board should not give its approval to any 
local graded wage scale, " as it is demoralizing to the trade 
and an incentive to reckless competition, and when work is 
scarce, causes first class men to offer their labor at a second 
or third class price." 2 The adoption of a system of graded 
wages has been proposed by members of the Granite Cut- 
ters' union as an alternative to piece-work as a means of re- 
moving the incentive in a single rate to the " rushing" of the 
slower men, but the suggestion has not met with favor. 3 

The Machinists have had to fight long against the grad- 
ing system, particularly in railroad and large specialty shops. 
In many railroad shops the machinists were graded before 
the union was established and the system has been abolished 
only after years of struggle. 4 The grading of journeymen 
according to competency in railroad and locomotive shops 
was naturally combined with classification according to the 
kind of work to which the men were assigned. The union 
has secured the gradual elimination of the lower rates and 
the introduction of a single minimum rate for all journey- 
men. 5 There are at present some local unions which clas- 
sify "specialists" in large shops for separate rating; but 
this is looked upon as a temporary condition. The Freight 
Handlers have also recently opposed with success the graded 
system. The Boiler Makers struck against it on a Cana- 

1 The Carpenter, March, p. 33, June, p. 22, 1905; March, p. 24, 
April, p. 39, May, p. 42, July, p. 30, 1906; March, p. 44, 1908. 

2 Constitution, 1898. After 1902 the words "or third" were 
dropped. The present wording is "at a second class price" (Con- 
stitution, 1908). 

3 Granite Cutters' Journal, April, 1886; July, 1902. See also 
Plumbers' Gas and Steam Fitters' Official Journal, June, 1905, p. 11; 
Bricklayers, Annual Reports, 1907, p. 17. 

4 Machinists' and Blacksmiths' Journal, April, 1871, pp. 181-4; 
Proceedings, May, 1893, P- xxxiv. 

See below, however, p. 103. 



The Standard Time Rate ioi 

dian road in 1908. 1 On some roads it is still followed for 
some trades. 2 

The grading of men according to length of service has 
not ordinarily been approved by the unions. The Street 
Railway Employees insist, where they are strong enough to 
secure wage agreements, on the same minimum rate for all 
men after the first year of service. Rates graded according 
to the number of years in service have prevailed widely in 
railroad work. Some years ago, when engineers were gen- 
erally paid by the month, it was customary to divide engi- 
neers into several wage grades according to the length of 
service. The Locomotive Engineers have fought for years 
against such a system of rating and successfully. The 
Brotherhood contended that a man assigned regularly to 
the engineer service should receive " first class " wages at 
once. Classification according to length of service did not 
represent differences in competency, but merely resulted in 
the employers' securing first class service from a number of 
men for less than the first class rate of wages. 

The graded system of rates has also been urged upon the 
union by the employers in the printing trade, but without 
favorable response from the former. The employing print- 
ers have from time to time expressed the opinion that the 
rate should be graded directly according to the efficiency of 
the workmen. In 1887 the United Typothetae, the national 
association of employing job and book printers, appointed 
a committee to consider the subject of a "Graded Scale of 
Wages." After some consideration, the committee recom- 
mended that in all places where printers' unions are in ex- 
istence such unions be requested to inaugurate a system of 
graded scales of wages among their members according to 
efficiency. In 1899 another committee appointed to con- 
sider the same subject, showed in its report a perfect appre- 
hension of the difficulty involved. "As we understand the 
matter," they said, " what is called a ' scale ' is supposed to 

1 Boiler Makers' Journal, 1908, r>p. 778, 853. 

2 Railway Carmen's Journal, 1908, pp. 357, 359, 420. 



102 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

represent the wage value of the poorest journeymen, the 
minimum wage for minimum ability; the expectation being 
that a better man will receive higher pay than ' scale.' In 
any case, it seems to us that any grading must be done pri- 
vately between the two parties at interest and that it would 
be impossible to satisfactorily grade all workmen, except by 
an elaborate system of examination which would be appall- 
ing to undertake as well as unsatisfactory to most of those 
graded below first." No local union has ever attempted to 
classify printers directly according to efficiency. 1 

The final proposals of the National Founders' Associa- 
tion to the Iron Molders' union in 1904 included one for the 
establishment of a graded system of wages for journeymen 
molders. The employers' proposal was that they should be 
allowed to employ forty per cent, of their journeymen mold- 
ers at a rate not more than ten per cent, below the " basic " 
rate. The "basic" rate was to be the minimum rate for 
not less than sixty per cent, of the journeymen. It was 
intended that the employer should decide which men were 
to receive the lower rate. 2 The basis of distinction between 
the two classes was to be that of comparative efficiency. 
The second rate was not to be paid simply to men doing 
coarse work ; the employers submitted a supplementary pro- 
posal that men on coarse work should be allowed to work 
at any rate the employer and the workmen might agree 

1 Barnett, p. 136. 

2 The employers proposed in the conference of March, 1901, that 
they should be allowed to employ twenty per cent, of their molders 
at twenty-five cents a day less than the standard rate, and twenty 
per cent, more at fifty cents a day less than the standard. This con- 
cession was urged partly on the ground that under its provisions 
coarse work might be done for less than the standard rate per hour 
and was suggested as an alternative to the proposal of the employers 
that a lower rate be set for the plainer work as such, to which the 
union had declined to accede (Iron Molders' Journal, 1901, pp. 191, 
'213; 1902, p. 284). The later proposal was intended also to cover 
the case of the less efficient men. In the conference held in March, 
1903, the employers' representatives modified their request and 
asked that they might be allowed to employ forty per cent, of the 
total number of bench and floor molders who had served a regular 
apprenticeship of four years at a differential rate ten per cent, less 
than the "basic" rate (Ibid., 1903, pp. 248, 346). 



The Standard Time Rate 103 

upon. The union representatives were not willing to agree 
to any general rule that journeymen molders employed in 
foundries of the same class, apart from those incapacitated 
by old age and young men just out of apprenticeship, should 
be grouped for separate union rating on the basis of differ- 
ence in competency. 1 

In some unions there are systems of rating which closely 
resemble grouping according to competency. Several unions 
allow young men just out of apprenticeship to work for 
three or six months or a year at specified rates lower than 
the regular minimum. Permission to work at a lower rate 
is granted to young journeymen who have just finished their 
apprenticeship more frequently by the metal-trades and 
railroad-shop unions than by the building-trades unions. In 
the first two classes of trades there are such differences in 
the character of the work done in different shops that a man 
who has served his apprenticeship in one and sought em- 
ployment in another may require several months to attain 
average proficiency in the shop. The Machinists particu- 
larly have many agreements with railroads allowing the pay- 
ment of lower rates to men just out of apprenticeship. This 
lower rate usually prevails only for three months. 2 This 
does not, of course, prevent a number of young men from 
receiving the regular rate from the start. The Molders 
pursue the same policy. Early in the conferences between 
that union and the National Founders' Association it was 
agreed that the minimum rate should not apply for a rea- 
sonable period to young men of " inexperience or mechan- 
ical inferiority " just out of apprenticeship. 3 

1 MS. Minutes of Conference, Detroit, April, 1904. The molders 
offered the following resolution as a substitute for the employers' 
proposal, " The wage-rate clause of a local agreement in its appli- 
cation shall be subject to such differentials as may be mutually 
agreed to by the local or national representatives of the two asso- 
ciations or a conference committee to whom the subject has been 
referred under the provisions of the New York agreement." 

2 Machinists' Journal, 1904, p. 1102; 1906, pp. 12, 1026; 1907, pp. 
442, 650. 

3 This resolution was adopted at the March, 1901, conference (Iron 
Molders' Journal, April, 1901, p. 191). 



104 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

By the creation of a separate class of " improvers " some 
unions have avoided the dilemma of either requiring the pay- 
ment to a recognizedly incompetent man of the minimum 
rate or of excluding him from the union and forcing him 
to work for what he can get in competition with union men. 
These unions allow a small number of men below the level 
of competency and too old for an additional year or more 
of apprenticeship to become members as " improvers " and 
work a specified period under instruction for a lower rate. 
This rate may be general for all " improvers " or it may 
be fixed separately for each one. In the former case the 
"improvers" form a group specially rated on the basis of 
competency. Such groups differ from the lower groups in 
ordinary systems of grading in that the workmen in them 
are regarded as being under instruction and in that the part 
of the total number of workmen in the group is very small. 
Improvers are found more frequently in the building trades 
than in any of the other groups. They have been admitted 
to membership, for instance, by local unions of the Car- 
penters, the Bricklayers, the Granite Cutters, the Marble 
Workers, the Plumbers and Gas Fitters, the Plasterers, the 
Painters, and the Tile Layers. In some local unions in 
which helpers are expected in time to become journeymen 
there is recognized a special class of improvers who are a 
grade above the helpers but not yet admitted to membership 
as journeymen. 1 

In most trades there is a feeling against the admission 
of men as improvers. Strong unions which have a well 
established apprenticeship system and do not commonly 
admit men who have acquired their knowledge of the trade 
while serving as helpers are particularly opposed to the 
recognition of the improver. This position is due in part 
to a belief that the admission of such men tends to lower 
the general level of competency expected for journeymen; 

1 In some local unions, as for instance, the Marble Workers, the 
Plumbers and the Tile Layers, there is a distinct class of advanced 
helpers, known as "improvers" or "juniors," which may include 
apprentices in the last year or two of their instruction. 



The Standard Time Rate 105 

but it may also be ascribed to a fear that the system will 
afford to some members who are proficient enough to de- 
serve the minimum, an opportunity to work for less. The 
Granite Cutters have come to reject the system on the latter 
ground, and the national union now condemns it. 1 As early 
as 1882 the Washington branch abolished the system be- 
cause they believed improvers to be " only an evasion of the 
bill." 2 The employment of improvers was prohibited in the 
New York agreement of 1890, and a similar provision exists 
in many current wage agreements. ■ 

Nearly all unions permit members who have become 
unable to command the minimum rate because of old age 
or physical infirmity to work for what they can get. There 
are a few time-working unions which have no rule to this 
effect, because the nature of the work is such that expe- 
rience offsets the loss of physical vigor, 3 or because physical 
vigor counts for so much in the work that old men are not 
wanted by the employers even at lower rates. 4 Some local 
unions which have both piece-price lists and time rates, as 
in a few of the Granite Cutters' branches, provide that old 
men employed by the hour or day shall be paid according 
to what their work averages by the piece bill. Some other 
local unions stipulate that the wages of the exempted men 
shall be agreed upon by a union committee in conference 
with the employer. 5 In very few local unions does the 

1 Granite Cutters' Journal, July, 1902 ; June, 1905. 

2 Ibid., October, 1882. 

3 This is stated by the national officials to be the case in the Stere- 
otypers' and Electrotypers' Union. 

4 The Steam Fitters, the Elevator Constructors, and the Bridge and 
Structural Iron Workers are such unions. Old men in the print 
cutters' trade drop to " felting," a minor branch of the union's juris- 
diction, for which no rate is set by the union because it is usually 
done by the old members. 

6 This is the general practice among the Stone Cutters' branches, 
and many of the Granite Cutters' agreements make similar provi- 
sions. In Quincy in 1905 the employers wished to construe " physical 
disability" in the exemption clause to mean slowness. The union 
denied that this was a proper interpretation (Granite Cutters' Journal, 
April, June, 1905). Old men are also exempted by the Granite Cut- 
ters from the national minimum of three dollars (Constitution, 1905, 
sec. 207). 



106 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

number of exempted men exceed five per cent, of the mem- 
bership, and the exemption is made on a much more ascer- 
tainable basis than competency. 

Ill 
The Union Rate and Actual Wages 

The standard minimum rate, as has already been several 
times noted, is in intent only a minimum, not a maximum. 
Union officials, in answer to the charge that the union wishes 
all members to be paid at the same rate, explain that the 
purpose of the union is to establish a rate below which no 
regular journeyman may go, and above which the employ- 
ers are expected to grade the better men. 1 

Provision for payment above the minimum. — A> small group 
of unions provide specifically for payments above the mini- 
mum. The wage system usually followed by the Barbers has, 
for instance, both a minimum and! a differential feature. The 
rates usually set include a minimum weekly wage, say ten 
or twelve dollars, and a percentage, usually fifty, of all that 
the j ourneyman takes in over a certain amount, say eighteen 
or twenty dollars. Some classes of drivers, notably milk 
drivers and brewery drivers, also stipulate in their agree- 
ments for a commission in addition to the minimum wage. 
For brewery drivers this is usually based on the number of 
cases of empty bottles brought back from their customers. 
Retail Clerks also not infrequently have provisions for com- 
missions in their wage agreements. 

Moreover, in making agreements for the establishment of 
a higher minimum, local unions sometimes insist on a pro- 
vision that the members who have been receiving more than 
the old minimum shall receive the same advance in their 
wages as the new minimum is over the old. Sometimes the 

*For example, Iron Molders' Journal, August, 1874, p. 6; July, 
1876, p. 12; July, 1887; June, 1897, p. 271; March, 1900, pp. 147-8; 
Granite Cutters' Journal, July, 1902, p. 5; The Carpenter, January, 
1906, p. 2; Plumbers' Journal, October, 1904; The Woodworker, 
October, 1906, p. 282; Machinists' Journal, 1900, p. 6; 1903, pp. 693, 
947; 1907, p. 4§5- 



The Standard Time Rate 107 

increase thus obtained is a percentage of the former rate, 
but more often it is a flat increase. The more highly paid 
members thereby retain the same differential above the new 
minimum that they received over the old. While the differ- 
entials which are thus perpetuated must first be secured by 
individual bargaining, 1 such action by the union undoubtedly 
influences the wages of the more highly paid members, since 
the retention of differentials by individual bargaining after 
the minimum rate has been raised is by no means a matter 
of course. 

The Machinists, in particular, follow the practice of se- 
curing advances for all in their agreements establishing new 
minimum rates. By the Chicago agreement of 1907, for 
instance, the minimum for journeymen machinists as well 
as that for tool makers and die-sinkers was raised twenty- 
five cents a day, and an increase of twenty-five cents a day 
secured for all who were receiving more than the old mini- 
mum rates. 2 The Iron Holders also often secure the same 
daily increase for all in their wage agreements. 3 Other 
unions, as, for instance, the Blacksmiths, the Carpenters, 
and the Wood Workers, follow the same practice, but less 
frequently. 

Another and more common form of union agreement 
for the payment of wages above the minimum is that of 
providing against the reduction of the wages of men who 

'A few of the Granite Cutters' local unions in New England still 
insist that differential wages shall be determined by the worker's 
average output in terms of the piece bill. This practice is very 
exceptional, however, and i9 a partial survival of the provision that 
men should be rated above or below a " basic " rate according to 
what their work averaged by the piece-price list. 

2 Machinists' Journal, 1900, p. 478; 1901, p. 380; 1903, pp. 6, 282, 
726, 743; 1906, p. 559; 1907, PP.74, 437, 439, 744- Sometimes the in- 
crease is the same percentage increase for all (Ibid., 1903, p. 141; 
1906, p. 348; 1907, pp. 262-3, 304, 354, 748, 753, 830). The Machinists 
also have a rule that a member who takes a position which has 
been vacated by a member who received more than the minimum rate 
must within thirty days receive the rate formerly paid (Constitu- 
tion, 1901, Art. XXV; Machinists' Journal, 1903, pp. 439, 622, 639; 
Constitution, 1903, Art. XXIV, clause 4). 

3 Iron Molders' Journal, 1901, p. 759; 1902, pp. 384, 551, 802, 970; 
1903, pp. 281-2, 381, 386, 389, 558, 641, 647. 



108 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

have been receiving more than the new minimum established 
in the agreement. Here the member who has been receiving 
more than the new minimum is secured in his rate by union 
bargaining; but union action in these cases does not, as in 
those previously discussed, retain the relative differentials 
for the higher paid men. Such provisions are common, par- 
ticularly in building-trade agreements. They are in many 
cases merely the result of an excess of caution; but in not 
a few cases they are the result of experience of such reduc- 
tions as they aim specifically to prevent. 1 

Union policy and the minimum. — On the other hand, 
there are in many unions policies or attitudes with reference 
to the relation of output and wages which discourage the 
payment of wages above the union minimum. The union 
rule or attitude in these cases does not have its origin in any 
opposition to the receiving of wages above the minimum. 
The prevention of " rushing " and of increasing the output 
expected of the average workman as " a day's work " is the 
direct end aimed at. 

One union, the Stone Cutters, goes so far as to forbid 
any member receiving more than the other men on the same 
"job." The officers defend this rule on the ground that it 
is the only way to prevent a few men in return for twenty- 
five or fifty cents more a day from setting a swifter pace 
for the others and so increasing the day's output demanded 
for the minimum wage. Unless all men on the same job re- 
ceive more than the minimum, which rarely occurs, except 
when men are in great demand, this prohibition amounts to- 
making the minimum a union maximum. Other building- 
trades unions offer less explicit discouragement to receiving 
more than the minimum rate for greater speed in working, 
but in general the sentiment of the men is against a few 
men receiving more than the others on the same job simply 
on account of greater speed. A few unions have specific 

a For instance, Granite Cutters' Journal, September, 1906, p. 4' r 
May, 1907, p. 5. 



The Standard Time Rate 109 

regulations against rushing or setting a pace. 1 The result 
is that in trades where speed can be compared men do about 
the same amount of work and payment above the minimum 
is usually for general competency or workmanship of a 
higher grade and not for speed. 2 

A few unions effectually discourage very great variation 
in wages on account of speed by the adoption of limits to 
the amount of work to be done in a day. The Lathers limit 
the day's work of wood lathers in many places, and a reso- 
lution establishing a national limit was adopted by the 1907 
convention. 3 " Stints " are observed in many local unions 
of other trades where the character of the work makes their 
enforcement feasible. Sometimes, as among the coat oper- 
ators and the cutters in the Garment Workers' Union and 
among the local unions of the art glass workers, these rules 
are adopted as defences against the enforcement of larger 
tasks by the employers. The Meat Cutters, when a strong 
union, gave much attention to limiting the day's work of 
time workers. At a meeting of the national executive board 
in 1901 to consider the formulation of a scale of wages " it 
was declared the sense of the executive board that in order 
to avoid the unjust methods that are often adopted by many 
superintendents and foremen in forcing unjust conditions 
by crowding the men that the amount of work to be per- 
formed and considered a fair day's work should be deter- 
mined, the same to be based on a ten hour day." 4 In the 
1902 convention the president of the union, in pointing out 

*For instance, Bricklayers' and Masons' National Constitution, 
1908, Art. XX, sec. 2; Constitution and By-Laws of the Bricklayers' 
Union, Number One of Maryland, 1904, By-Laws, Art. VIII, sec. 1. 
The 1880 Constitution of the Granite Cutters contained a resolution 
against " rushing." 

2 The " rusher," the unions contend, relies simply on his physical 
strength to do a large amount of work of one kind, and usually is 
poor at other kinds. He wears himself out and in the long run 
loses by this course, while injuring the interests of his fellow 
workman. General competency and not mere speed, they argue, 
should be encouraged by higher wages. See, for instance, Granite 
Cutters' Journal, July, 1878; February, p. 10, July, p. 4, 1904. 

3 Proceedings, 1907, p. 1 12. 

4 Proceedings, 1902, p. 25. 



no Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

that the time had not yet come to adopt a uniform scale for 
hog butchers stated that the prevention of rushing should 
be enforced before anything else. 1 The Chicago local un- 
ions, while they were able, enforced limits which consider- 
ably reduced the average output. 2 

It has long been common among the Iron Molders to ob- 
serve a " set day's work." Originally, a " set " was the 
number of castings which a man was expected by the em- 
ployer to do. 3 The workmen later began in many localities 
to adopt "sets" for themselves, and the amount of work 
which was to be regarded as a " set " came finally to be the 
subject of agreement between the employer and the shop 
committee. 4 The union regards the establishment of a 
" set " by the shop committee 5 as necessary at times for the 
protection of the workers against rushing, and refuses to 
give up the practice. 6 The Molders' representatives in the 
conferences with the National Founders' Association were 
willing to agree that no local union should establish a " set " 
without the consent of the national executive board, 7 but 
would not agree that " sets " should not be established with- 
out the consent of the employer. 8 

1 Proceedings, 1902, pp. 38-41, 50. 

2 Official Journal, March, 1903. An editorial in the Granite Cut- 
ters' Journal for July, 1902, while admitting the evils of " rushing," 
opposed the setting of a limit to the day's work. There is a tend- 
ency in this union now to require that the faster men shall receive 
wages proportional to their output (Granite Cutters' Journal, June, 
1902, p. 6; June, 1905, p. 4). The Boston local union places a fine 
on a member who does more than an average day's work without 
receiving proportionate wages (Ibid., July, 1905, p. 4). 

3 Iron Molders' Journal, May, 1874, p. 367 ; December, 1885 ; Octo- 
ber, 1886; October, 1887; August, 1891. 

4 Ibid., March, 1887; July. 1904, p. 520; Proceedings, 1890, p. 30; 
Proceedings, 1899, pp. 23, 24. 

6 The " set " is established only for castings which are to be made 
in considerable number. The average daily output of the man who 
first makes the castings is usually recognized by the shop committee 
as the established " set." 

"Iron Molders' Journal, 1897, p. 271; 1900, p. 530; Proceedings, 
1907, p. 12. 

7 MS. Minutes of conferences, April, 1902, and October, 1902 ; Iron 
Molders' Journal, May, 1902. 

8 The union offered the following counter resolution: "That ar- 
bitrary limitation of output on the part of the molders or excessive 
demands for output on the part of the foundryman or his represen- 



The Standard Time Rate m 

The union opposition to " premium " and " bonus " plans 
is also a barrier in the way of certain workers' obtaining 
more than the minimum rate. The essential feature of the 
" premium " and " bonus " plans is that the worker for ex- 
tra output receives pay above his daily time rate. In some 
cases the extra pay is given if he exceeds a stipulated output, 
which is usually the average attained before the introduc- 
tion of the plan ; in other cases, the extra pay is given only 
if he reaches a specified output considerably in excess of the 
previous average output. The rate per piece offered for 
the additional output in nearly all of these plans is less than 
the labor cost per piece before the plan was adopted. 1 

Premium and bonus plans of remuneration have met with 
opposition particularly in the metal trades; for it is in this 
group of trades that they have been most frequently offered 
to union members. 2 The Machinists in particular have vig- 
orously opposed the plans. 3 The convention held in 1905 
declared it to be the policy of the union to secure the with- 
drawal of such systems of payment in the shops in which 
they had been introduced and forbade members under pain 
of expulsion to accept payment under such a plan in any 
shop in which it was not already established. 4 The 1907 
convention repeated this declaration of opposition. 5 The 
Iron Molders also have opposed these methods of remunera- 
tion for years. As early as 1887 there was objection on 

tative shall not be permitted, nor shall the practice of employing a 
" pace-maker " be given any countenance whatever, and it shall not 
be considered a violation of this provision if a molder does not 
duplicate the output of one so employed; but on the other hand, a 
molder shall be required to do at all times a fair and reasonable 
day's work" (Iron Molders' Journal, May, 1903, p. 346). The 
Molders adhered to this position in the final conference in 1904. 

1 The union opposition to premium and bonus plans is treated here 
as a discouragement of differential wages rather than in connection 
with the union attitude toward forms of the standard rate, because 
in nearly all cases the employer offers the plan to the workmen as 
individuals and not to the union as an alternative form of payment 
to the time or piece system. See, however, below p. 112. 

2 See Appendix B for a description by their advocates of some of 
the best known of these plans. 

8 Machinists' Journal, 1900, p. 104; 1903, p. 722; August, 1904. 

4 Proceedings, 1905, p. 78. 

B Proceedings, 1907, pp. 47, 68. 



1 1 2 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

the part of the union to the " day and a dollar," or " day and 
a quarter " or " day and a half " system of payment, under 
which a man or group of men who reduced by a specified 
amount the average time for turning out a specified amount 
of product received a dollar or a fraction of a day's wage 
in addition to the regular daily rate. 1 The same attitude 
of hostility is maintained by the Boiler Makers 2 and the 
Blacksmiths. 3 

Other unions, whose members willingly work under the 
piece system, oppose the introduction of the premium and 
bonus systems. The officers of the Boot and Shoe Workers 
and of the Garment Workers, for instance, state that the 
bonus and premium systems are not often offered to their 
members, but are refused when they are. Both these unions 
are predominantly piece-working unions. A few local un- 
ions of the Typographical Union permit their members to 
work under the bonus plan. The national union in 1893 
forbade machine operators to accept bonuses paid for 
greater output; but the prohibition was repealed the next 
year. In 1902 the rule was adopted that no machine opera- 
tor can accept a bonus "not provided for in the scale of 
prices." 4 

The unions oppose the premium and bonus systems on 
two grounds. In the first place, the unions object to these 
systems because they are intended to stimulate the worker 
to exceed the amount he has been producing. This stimu- 
lus is especially strong when the bonus is paid only if a 
high specified output is reached, and systems with such a 
provision are particularly obnoxious from the union stand- 
point. The unions assume that the production of the in- 
creased output will require such an increase of effort and 

1 Iron Molders' Journal, October, 1887 ; August, 1891 ; 1903, pp. 26, 
189; 1904, pp. 170, 173; Proceedings, 1895; Proceedings, 1899, p. 30; 
Proceedings, 1907, pp. 148, 160, 170. 

2 Boiler Makers' Journal, 1908, p. 478; Constitution, 1908, Art. 
XIV, sec. 13. 

3 Blacksmiths' Journal, January, 1903, p. 14. 

4 Barnett, pp. 133, 202-3. 



The Standard Time Rate 113 

nervous strain as to injure the health of the workers. 1 
Moreover, it is feared that after a large output has been 
reached by some workers under the stimulus of the extra 
payments, the new output will become the task required 
from all, and that then the premiums or bonuses will be 
greatly reduced or withdrawn or offered only as a reward 
for still more intense effort, so that the daily tasks will have 
been considerably increased without an appreciable perma- 
nent increase in the daily rate. 2 The second ground of 
opposition by the unions is that the worker is offered a 
lower rate per piece for the additional output than he has 
been receiving. 3 It is for this reason chiefly that unions 

1 It is a common belief among unionists that workmen are now re- 
quired to work with an intensity which is close to, if not beyond, the 
limit consistent with a proper length of working life. The advocates 
of the premium and bonus systems described in Appendix B. assume, 
on the contrary, that most workers could greatly exceed their present 
intensity of effort without undue exhaustion or injury to health. 
But the advocates of the most recent of these systems put emphasis 
also on the possibilities of increased output from improved methods 
of application of human energy. Their bonus payments are intended 
both to stimulate the worker to greater effort and to induce him 
to adopt the more scientific methods of accomplishing his tasks 
which it is an essential part of their plans to discover and point 
out to him. See Appendix B. 

2 A series of resolutions adopted by the Molders in their 1907 con- 
vention condemning every system of payment which " in its applica- 
tion may work an injury to our membership " included the following: 
" Any system which in practice may result in abnormally increasing 
the amount of work which a molder must perform, any shop practice 
which allows an over-reaching employer to use the most active and 
powerful to set the pace which all must follow is unfair and in- 
jurious to the man of average capacity. The premium system as 
generally in practice tends to increase the molders' output without 
a corresponding increase in wages and is therefore unfair. The day 
and a dollar, day and a half, and kindred systems have been and are 
being used to unduly increase the amount of labor a molder must 
give each day to his employer and as a result of both of these gen- 
eral systems the molder in middle age finds it difficult to secure work 
in shops where they prevail, as the standard of output has been set 
so high that only the younger and more vigorous members can main- 
tain it" (Proceedings, 1907, p. 170). 

3 Some employers defend the lower rate for the extra output on 
the ground that the extra payment is an inducement to the worker 
to do better than he otherwise would, and so results in his receiving 
higher wages than he would attain under the straight day wage sys- 
tem. The advocates of the more recent bonus plans described in 
Appendix B expect the increased output to come largely from more 
intelligent organization of the work and from the more scientific 

8 



H4 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

almost without exception prefer the straight piece system 
to premium or bonus systems. 

Wages and efficiency. — Very little seems to be known as 
to the differences in efficiency among men engaged in the 
same kind of work. It is safe to assume, however, that 
they are not reflected in time-working trades with any ex- 
actness by the wages paid, even where there is no union 
minimum. When the union confines its action in wage rat- 
ing to the establishment of a single minimum rate for mem- 
bers engaged in the same kind of work, it is obvious that the 
adjustment of individual earnings to individual capacity is 
not as likely to be secured as under the piece-rate system. 
Even where the union does not discourage large outputs, the 
time wages of the better men do not exceed the minimum in 
the same proportion that the men show efficiency above the 
average. It is safe to state that generally when men whose 
earning capacity is above that of the average journeyman 
are left dependent upon individual bargaining for wages 
above the minimum, they do not receive additional wages 
commensurate with their superior capacity. 

Of most time-working unions it can be said, however, 
that the variations in efficiency within the membership are 
not as wide as among men in the same trades outside the 
union. The mere insistence on a minimum rate which is 
intended to be almost as much, if not as much, as the aver- 
age member can successfully demand, necessarily excludes 
from the union men much below the average of competency. 
Such men cannot obtain regular employment at the union 
rate, and it is consequently useless for them to retain union 
membership. 

But time-working unions do not rely solely upon a high 
minimum to keep their membership clear of men consider- 
ably below the average in competency. Practically all of 
the skilled trades require that candidates for membership 

application of effort. The worker receives the bonus partly as an 
inducement to cooperate in the introduction of the new methods. 
See Appendix B. The system of payment is in these cases only a 
part of a wider plan. 



The Standard Time Rate 115 

must prove their competency or be vouched for as compe- 
tent by members who have worked with them. Where the 
testimony of members on the same "job" is accepted as 
sufficient evidence of competency the test is practically re- 
duced to ability to secure employment at the minimum rate. 
In a number of unions, however, as, for instance, the Plumb- 
ers, the Electrical Workers, the Stereotypers and Electro- 
typers, and the Bricklayers, the candidate must prove his 
competency by passing a serious examination set by a special 
board or committee. Finally, many time-working unions 
attempt to insure that the membership shall be recruited 
from competent journeymen by recognizing a normal method 
of learning the trade under union auspices. The appren- 
ticeship regulations of the unions are directed in large part 
to this end, as are the provisions made by a number of 
unions for advancement from the status of helper to that 
of journeyman after a given number of years under instruc- 
tion in the former capacity. 

The maintenance of a minimum rate by a union also in 
another way tends to make wages uniform. The fact that 
a given rate is the " union " rate, and as such becomes the 
center of attention and the subject of negotiation and even 
of conflict — this makes it the presumptive rate. Moreover, 
many employers who are brought with much reluctance to 
agree to observe the minimum look upon the minimum as a 
" lump " rate which they have agreed to pay the union for 
the labor of its members. These employers often take the 
ground that they should not be expected or can not afford 
to pay the better men more than the minimum, because they 
are compelled to pay the union rate to many men who are 
not worth it. The provisions in agreements noted above 
against reducing the higher men are evidences of this 
feeling. The union officials assert that some employers' 
associations have a rule against paying men more than the 
minimum. 1 There is, of course, a greater likelihood of 

1 Granite Cutters' Journal, September, 1906, p. 4. Such agree- 
ments are said to exist among the employers in several of the build- 
ing trades in New York City. 



n6 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

united action against the payment of differential wages 
when the minimum is established by agreement of the union 
and the employers as a body. 

The same forces that lead to the payment of wages above 
the average rate where there is no union minimum, how- 
ever, often operate to cause the payment of wages above the 
union minimum, even though their effectiveness is reduced 
by the union regulations noted above. The chief of these 
forces is, of course, competition. Employers are often 
compelled to comply with the demands of the more efficient 
men for higher wages in order to retain them. There are 
many employers, too, who pay the better men more than the 
minimum, as a matter of course, as compensation for supe- 
rior service and as an inducement to the men to put forth 
their best efforts. 1 

In any attempt to estimate the extent to which men re- 
ceive wages above the minimum on account of superior effi- 
ciency, it is important to bear in mind that the minimum 
in different scales may stand in very different relation to the 
modal or predominant wage. The proportion of men re- 
ceiving more than the union minimum in a trade is fre- 
quently large because the competitive wage has increased 
since the minimum was established. Where the minimum 
is established by an agreement it is customary to make it 
binding for a specified period, and if in that time the com- 
petitive wage for men increases considerably the employers 
will frequently offer wages above the minimum to men of 
no more than average competency. 2 Sometimes the union 

1 The payment of a wage rate above the minimum is not the sole 
form of differential compensation. Often the better men receive 
the same hourly rate but are given more regular employment, the 
cleanest and most desirable work, and even overtime payment for 
merely nominal work. Because of such considerations workmen in 
the building trades will often remain with an employer at the mini- 
mum rate when other employers are offering two or three cents an 
hour more. 

2 Iron Molders' Journal, 1900, pp. 147, 212; Machinists' Journal, 

1906, pp. 642, 824, 827; The Carpenter, August, 1905, pp. 29, 40; 
October, 1905, p. 29; July, p. 42, November, p. 42, 1906; February, 

1907, p. 49; Stone Cutters' Journal, 1907, passim; Plumbers' Journal, 
October, 1905, p. 10. 



The Standard Time Rate 117 

refrains from raising the minimum when an increased de- 
mand for men would make that possible. In 1906 the sec- 
retary of the Bricklayers' and Masons' Union cautioned the 
local unions against putting up the rate when the demand is 
brisk to a point at which it can be permanently maintained 
only by throwing some members out of regular employ- 
ment. 1 A few branches of the Granite Cutters have pro- 
visions in their agreements to the effect that if an employer 
advertises for men at more than the minimum rate he shall 
pay the higher rate to all in his employ. 2 

The union minimum is sometimes fixed for other reasons 
below the wage rates of most of the men to whom it applies. 
The rate may be kept low in order to permit men to secure 
employment who would not be able to do so if the predomi- 
nant wage were taken as the minimum. This policy has 
been followed in some cities by the local unions of masons 
in the Bricklayers' and Masons' Union. Local unions of 
the Machinists, too, occasionally set a low minimum rate 
rather than a starting rate and a higher regular minimum. 3 
Again, a group of workers who usually command a higher 
rate of pay than other journeymen in the trade may not be 
given a separate union rate. An instance in point is that 
of cabinet makers or " bench men " in the Carpenters' Union 
who are given the same minimum rate as machine wood 
workers. 

The extent to which differential wages are paid above the 
union minimum, when that rate is the rate actually paid to 
the men whose efficiency is about the average, varies widely 
in different trades. There are trades in which differential 

1 Annual Reports, 1906, p. 299. Members may not strike for more 
than the minimum rate. But men may strike to enforce payment of 
more than the minimum from a contractor who has agreed to pay 
more and later refuses (Ibid., p. 28). 

2 Agreement for Ortonville, Minn., 1902; Agreement for Burling- 
ton, Iowa, 1903; Granite Cutters' Journal, July, 1901, pp. 4, 10; 
August, p. 7, September, p. 2, 1906; June, 1908, p. 9. The Granite 
Cutters' agreements as a rule run for longer periods than those of 
other building-trades unions. 

3 Machinists' Journal, 1904, p. 1004; 1905, pp. 139, 625; 1906, pp. 
437, 441, 642, 1006; 1907, pp. 117, 646; The Carpenter, June, 1905, 
p. 30. 



n8 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

payments of this character are very exceptional. Unskilled 
laborers, such as the ordinary building laborers, are com- 
monly paid one flat rate whether organized or not. The 
same is largely true of men paid by the day or hour in street 
railway or railroad service. In union agreements with the 
street railway companies, the minimum rate is usually the 
same for all after the first year of service, and the com- 
panies almost without exception make this the actual rate. 
Men in the railroad yard service are paid by the hour and 
yard engineers, firemen, conductors, and trainmen prac- 
tically all receive the minimum rates set for their respective 
classes. Men employed in railroad shops rarely receive 
more than the minimum rates, although in these same trades 
in the contract shops a considerable part of the men receive 
wages above the minimum. Standardization of workmen 
and of work and the practice of dealing with large bodies 
of men as classes tend to standardize the wages paid in the 
railway service more than in trades calling for similar 
grades of skill in other industries. 1 

In the building trades, the higher rates in the large cities 
tend to attract the better men and keep out the poorer and 
this tends to reduce the variations in competency from the 
average. The employment of men in larger numbers and 
the more frequent changing of the men, together with the 
•existence of employers' associations for dealing with the 
unions, also make for greater uniformity in actual payment 
in the large cities than in the smaller places. 2 Wages among 
the Stone Cutters and the Granite Cutters seem to conform 
more closely to the minimum than in the other building 

1 The tendency toward uniform rates for men engaged in the same 
kind of work is stronger in large establishments than in small estab- 
lishments for the same reasons. 

2 It is difficult to get anything more than estimates of the percent- 
age of men receiving wages above the minimum. The secretary of 
the Composition Roofers estimates that not more than two per cent, 
of the members in New York City receive more than the minimum. 
An official of the Steam Fitters estimates that for his union in New 
York City the proportion is not less than five nor more than ten 
per cent. 



The Standard Time Rate 119 

trades. 1 The reason for this in the case of the Stone Cut- 
ters has been indicated. 

In the printing trades, particularly among the composi- 
tors and the stereotypers and electrotypers, 2 and in the metal 
trades the proportion of workmen receiving more than the 
minimum is larger than in the building trades. The diver- 
sified nature of the work included within the trade and the 
consequent differences in experience and skill among the 
membership, combined with the absence of graded union 
rates, account largely for the prevalence of differential pay- 
ments among the Molders 3 and Machinists. 4 

1 See, however, Granite Cutters' Journal, May, 1907, p. 4, May, 
1908, p. 10. 

2 An officer of the local union of the Stereotypers' and Electro- 
typers' Union estimates that about 50 out of 650 members in New- 
York City receive more than the minimum. The electrotype finish- 
ers, but not the electrotype founders, are included in the organiza- 
tion there. In Boston where both branches are included, the secre- 
tary estimates that forty per cent, receive more than the minimum. 

3 A national official of the Molders' Union estimates that at least 
thirty per cent, of the members receive more than the minimum. 
This is the highest estimate obtained for any union. In the Iron 
Molders' Journal for September, 1900 (p. 532), a correspondent de- 
clares that there is not a foundry in the country in which some men 
do not get more than the minimum. In the number for March, 1900 
(p. 147), it was reported that in Milwaukee where the minimum was 
$2.75 " some of our best men get $3.50." . 

4 Machinists' Journal, 1906, p. 642; 1907, pp. 74, 354, 437, 441, 744. 



CHAPTER III 

THE AREA OF THE STANDARD RATE 

The extent of territory over which a standard rate is 
binding, that is to say, the "area" of the standard rate, 
varies greatly from union to union and even within certain 
unions. Some rates are standard only for a shop or plant; 
others are standard for a city; others, for a district or a 
section embracing a number of cities, or for a single state, or 
for a group of states; many others are standard for all 
shops under the jurisdiction of the national union. The 
majority of American trade unionists work under rates 
applicable only to single localities. The next largest number 
work under "district" rates. Those working under "na- 
tional " rates constitute the smallest class ; but they are for 
the most part included in the membership of old and estab- 
lished unions. 

A distinction is immediately observable in the matter of 
the area of standard rates between time-working and piece- 
working unions. The great bulk of time-working unions 
have only " local " rates, that is, rates standard for a town, 
a city, or a city and suburbs; whereas in piece-working 
unions rates are, for the most part, standard either for only 
a single shop or for all the shops in a territory much wider 
than a single locality. Piece rates are, therefore, much more 
frequently district or national rates than local rates. 
This difference is due in large measure, of course, to a cor- 
responding difference in the influences affecting the appli- 
cation of these respective rates. Difficulties are often met 
in trying to make piece rates standard throughout a locality 
which are absent in the case of time rates— technical diffi- 
culties in constructing a scale which will account for diversi- 
ties in work and in working conditions in different shops. 
On the other hand, where these difficulties are absent, forces 

1 20 



The Area of the Standard Rate 12 1 

which do not operate to nearly the same degree on time rates 
are usually at work tending to widen the area of application 
of piece rates beyond the single locality. In the present 
chapter the area of standard rates will be examined, first, 
as to piece rates, second, as to time rates. 

I 
Area of Piece Scales 

The smallest practicable area of a standard piece scale is 
the shop. Many local unions which now have uniform local 
lists or are subject to lists of wider than local application 
had at one time separate shop scales for similar work. This 
is particularly true in those trades in which there is con- 
siderable variety in product within each shop, as in garment 
working. In such cases the first step of the workmen 
toward wage regulation has been to secure a recognized list 
of prices in each shop. 1 The shop does not, however, ordi- 
narily continue a satisfactory unit of scale uniformity. 
Most unions which have had separate shop lists in the same 
locality have early aimed to extend the area of the rates or 
of the scale basis. If this has been impracticable they have 
in many cases favored the abolition of piece work alto- 
gether. Where unions still have entirely separate shop 
lists in the same locality it will usually be found that work 
or conditions vary considerably from shop to shop or that 
the union is weak or but recently organized. 

Some strong unions maintain separate shop lists as a 
matter of accepted policy where these lists are included 
within a local or wider system of wage "equalization." 2 
When shop lists are equalized, although each shop has its 
own separate list, all the lists are subject to a common 
basis, and are intended to give under diverse conditions or 
under diverse methods of production equal rates of remu- 

1 The early local unions of the Molders directed attention in the 
matter of prices first to securing a recognized list in each shop 
(Iron Molders' Journal, September, 1875, p. 426; August, 1876, p. 69). 

2 The term " equalization " is sometimes used also in the sense of 
uniformity in prices. 



122 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

neration, and to provide the same rate for identical work 
where done under the same conditions. The unions which 
maintain equalized lists would probably be strong enough 
to maintain uniform lists for the same territory, if work 
and working conditions were uniform. 

The movement toward local equalization began early 
among the Molders. 1 In 1862 the Philadelphia union, the 
leading union in the trade, with a membership of 440, and 
with the best prices in the trade, compromised a demand 
for an increase in wages by accepting equalization of prices 
among the shops. 2 The Molders of Troy secured an equali- 
zation in the same year, 3 and in several other cities similar 
movements were set on foot. 4 But in some cities the equali- 
zation movement made but slow headway. As late as 1880 
there was complaint that in various places prices for similar 
work varied from ten to twenty-five per cent. 5 By the late 
eighties, however, complaints of local inequalities had 
ceased and attention was directed toward attaining uni- 
formity over wider areas. 

The Hatters' lists of prices also are shop lists subject to 
local equalization, being equalized over " districts " small 
enough to be considered localities. Newark, for instance, 
constitutes one district, whereas the Oranges are in a sepa- 
rate district. No district contains more than two local 
unions. The Hatters have always tried to keep district 
prices equalized, 6 but in 1898 and 1899 a special attempt 
was made to remove inequalities, which was regarded as 
successful. 7 There is now a national minimum bill for stiff 
hats which must be observed in the shop prices for this class 
of work. 8 

x The lists are now equalized over districts much larger than a 
single city. See below, p. 139. 

2 Iron Molders' Journal, June, 1874, p. 385 ; May, 1881. The Phil- 
adelphia union was the first local union in the trade to maintain 
its existence for any considerable time; it was organized in 1855. 
The national union was organized in 1859. See above, p. 48. 

3 International Journal, April, 1866, p. 3 ; May, 1866, p. 49. 

4 Ibid., July, 1866. 

5 Iron Molders' Journal, June, 1880, p. 2. 
"Journal of the United Hatters, September, 1898. 

7 Ibid., September, 1898; April, 1899, p. 4; September, 1899. 

8 See below, p. 162. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 123 

A large number of differences in work or in working con- 
ditons between the several shops in the same locality, par- 
ticularly if the. patterns are frequently changing, make a 
system of careful equalization of individual prices practi- 
cally impossible. All that can be hoped for is an evening-up 
of the average earnings which can be made by persons of 
approximately the same efficiency in the various shops. 
Equalization requires for its successful working that the 
finished articles at least 1 shall be similar enough and stable 
enough to afford a basis of comparison of the prices for the 
articles in the lists of the various shops. Frequent changes 
and numerous differences in styles and in the conditions 
under which work is carried on discourage nearly all of the 
branches of the Ladies' Garment Workers' Union in New 
York City from attempts to establish uniform or equalized 
lists. The Boot and Shoe Workers, too, have separate shop 
scales, largely because of differences in working conditions. 
In Brockton, for instance, there were in 1908 eight piece- 
working local unions representing different branches of the 
trade, and of these only one had a uniform price list. In 
the other seven branches there are differences between the 
shops in the task to be done for the rate, in the amount of 
each kind of work to be done without change to another 
kind, and in other conditions affecting output, which would 
result in varied earning power under a uniform price list. 
Workers often earn higher wages in the shops with the low- 
est prices. The workers, though favoring uniform lists and 
uniform conditions as ideals, are for the most part inclined 
to accept the existing differences as serious obstacles to 
either. 2 Similar differences in conditions and in patterns 

1 As distinguished from the patterns of the component parts as in 
a garment or shoe. 

2 President's Report to the 1904 Convention. See also Report of 
the Chief of the Bureau of Information established by the 1904 
Convention to secure complete lists of prices paid (Proceedings, 
1906, p. 49). 

A few separate shop lists are found also in trades which as a rule 
have uniform local or national price lists. Unions with national 
scales like the Flint Glass Workers, the Potters, the Iron, Steel and 
Tin Workers have here and there a shop or plant turning out work 



124 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

account in part for the separate shop lists of the Metal Pol- 
ishers and of the Leather Workers. Here as in the two 
unions just discussed it is doubtful if all the equalization 
possible under present conditions has been secured. 1 If 
these unions were stronger and had faced the problem for 
a longer period, they would doubtless have secured a closer 
approach to uniformity in prices, and thus ultimately to 
uniformity in conditions. 

Separate shop scales are still maintained in trades in 
which uniform lists, or a close approach to uniformity in 
rates, seem technically feasible. Such apparently are the 
lists in the local spinning (other than mule spinning) and 
weaving unions of the Textile Workers in the large textile 
centers, in some branches of the United Garment Workers 
in a number of cities, in some branches of the Glove Work- 
ers, in the Brushmakers, in the Travellers' Goods and 
Leather Novelty Workers, and in the Piano and Organ 
Workers. Certain branches of the Garment Workers have 
separate shop lists in some cities and uniform lists in others. 2 
The Brushmakers have a uniform list in New York, but not 
in other cities. The lack of uniform lists in these unions is 
not due chiefly to important differences in conditions or 
diversities in product, but to the comparative weakness of 
the union or to its unfamiliarity with the problem. 3 

Local scales. — In those piece-working trades in which the 
product is simple and not subject to many variations requir- 
ing separate rating, the earliest union scales have probably 

under special conditions, for which a separate list is made. Other 
unions which are almost entirely time-working unions have occasional 
shops working under the piece system with shop lists. These are 
isolated cases, not groups of shops in the same locality. 

*The Ladies' Garment Workers, the Metal Polishers, and the 
Leather Workers are comparatively weak unions. The Boot and 
Shoe Workers have been strong in most of the branches here re- 
ferred to only in recent years and must move slowly in local wage 
matters because bound by arbitration contracts. 

2 For instance, the Baltimore Pants Makers do not have a uniform 
list of prices although those of New York, including Brooklyn, and 
Boston have. 

3 The Piano and Organ Workers, the Glove Workers, and the 
Travellers' Goods and Leather Novelty Workers are opposed to the 
piece system. If strong enough they would abolish it altogether. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 125 

been for localities rather than for single shops. This has 
been true at least of the scales of some of the earliest local 
unions. The oldest Printers' scales of which we have 
knowledge were city scales. In New York and Philadelphia 
the unions were organized to "raise and establish prices," 
and the resulting lists were for all the shops in the city. 1 It 
is probable that in prices so easily compared as the price per 
thousand ems for each of the few sizes of type, and for 
common matter and the few variations from it then recog- 
nized, there was practical uniformity in the shops of each 
city before the local society made its influence on prices felt. 2 
The Cigar Makers' first union price lists were, in some 
cases at least, uniform lists for the city. Before any union 
price list was adopted in Baltimore, the prices in the various 
shops conformed closely, and union action was taken only 
in cases of attempted reduction from the prices previously 
paid in the given shop. 3 It was also a well-understood rule 
that no member should offer to make cigars for less than 
was paid another member. 4 But the union did not establish 
separate price lists for different shops. In 1861 an attempt 
was made by the union to establish certain local minimum 
prices applicable to all the shops, but the attempt was not 
sustained. 5 In 1879 Baltimore joined with other cities in a 
movement towards uniform local bills of prices, a move- 
ment which was generally successful, 6 but not in Baltimore, 7 
where a uniform local list was not secured until 1886. 

1 Barnett, pp. 3, 6, Appendix V. 

2 The New York master printers in a counter proposal to the Typo- 
graphical Society in 1809 as to their proposed list of prices refer 
to "the customary wages" (Barnett, p. 363). 

3 The union frequently sustained members in refusing to accept 
reductions (MS. Minutes of Baltimore Cigar Makers' Union, Feb- 
ruary 6, 1863; March 18, May 7, 14, 28, August 19, 1881). 

4 MS. Minutes of Baltimore Cigar Makers' Union, February 1, 
1861. 

5 Ibid.. November 13 and 17, 1861. 

6 Cigar Makers' Journal, September, October, November, 1879; 
February, April, 1880; September, 1881 ; MS. Minutes of Cigar 
Makers' Union, No. 1, of Baltimore, May 17, 23, 30, June 7, 28, July 
5, 1881. 

T MS. Minutes of Maryland Association of Cigar Makers, Novem- 
ber 7, 14, 1879; January 12, March 9, 18, April 6, May 28, 31, August 
<5, 1880. 



126 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

The Puddlers' union scale was originally a scale for all 
the mills in and around Pittsburgh. The price for puddling 
was the chief item in the scale and it was here easy to 
enforce uniformity. 1 There are other piece-working unions 
in which uniform local lists are now the rule rather than the 
exception. The United Garment Workers have such scales 
in most of their piece-working branches in those cities in 
which they are strong. The pants makers and vest makers 
particularly insist on uniform scales. The Coopers, the 
Tailors, the Broom Makers and the Tobacco Workers also 
maintain uniform local lists. The few typographical local 
unions which permit piece work have local piece scales, as 
do the remaining piece- working branches of the Granite 
Cutters, and, for the most part, those of the Bookbinders. 

The locality is a much more desirable unit of piece-scale 
application than is the shop; yet for most trades the local- 
ity is not regarded as setting natural limits to the extent of 
uniformity in piece rates. This is true particularly of those 
trades whose product is to a considerable extent sold in a 
competitive market extending beyond the localities in which 
it is produced. If a uniform price list is practicable in 
such a trade for the shops in a city, one is usually also tech- 
nically feasible for shops more widely scattered. Moreover, 
as comparisons between the prices paid in the competing 
cities can be made with relative ease, forces will be set in 
motion toward the establishment of a uniform list for all 
the shops within the area of competition. The local unions 
with the higher prices will struggle to bring up the lower 
cities to their own level, and will urge the adoption of a uni- 
form list to insure that such competition shall not again 
creep in. 

Several instances of such movements for lists of wider 
application may be found among the unions which still main- 
tain local lists. There is a strong feeling in some of the 

1 The continuous organization of the puddlers dates from 1858, but 
as early as 1849 there was a great strike against a reduction in the 
price of puddling (Annual Report of the Bureau of Industrial Sta- 
tistics, State of Pennsylvania, 1878-79, pp. 52, 151). 



The Area of the Standard Rate 127 

local unions in the pants-making and vest-making branches 
of the United Garment Workers for national lists. The 
pants makers, particularly in the higher-priced cities, are 
eager for a uniform price list for the whole country. 1 The 
Hatters, too, have adopted a national minimum bill for soft 
hats and have voted in favor of one for stiff hats. 2 The 
Tailors also hold to a uniform price bill as an ideal. 3 

For many years there has been a movement for a wider 
extent of scale application, and even for national uniformity 
in prices among the Cigar Makers. As early as 1854 the 
Cigar Makers of New York State met in convention at the 
call of the unions of Troy, Syracuse, Rochester, Utica, 
Albany, and Auburn. One of the objects of the convention 
was to establish state-wide prices. No permanent organi- 
zation was formed; but the prices agreed upon were used 
generally as a guide, for a few years at least. 4 In the con- 
vention held in 1866, two years after the organization of the 
national union, a motion to establish a minimum national 
price for a certain kind of cigars was laid on the table only 
after a long debate. 5 When the local unions were moving 
for uniformity in local bills in 1879-1881 the agitation for 
a uniform national price list arose again. 6 The depressing 
effect exerted upon prices by competition from places with 
low price lists was urged as a reason for uniformity. 7 The 
president of the national union pointed out that some local 
unions could not advance prices as readily as others, and 
discouraged the movement. 8 Since that time it has been 

1 Weekly Bulletin, March 4, 1903 ; Proceedings, 1906. See also, 
Garment Worker, December, 1895 ; November, 1901 ; Weekly Bul- 
letin, October 28, November 4, 1903; December 23, 1904; September 
7, 1906; August 30, 1907; Proceedings, 1900; Proceedings, 1904. 

2 See below, p. 162. 

3 The Tailor, March, 1906. 

4 Journal and Programme of the Twentieth Session, 1893, p. 43. 
8 Proceedings, 1866, p. 90. 

6 Proceedings, 1880, in Cigar Makers' Journal, October, 1880, p. 6. 

7 Cigar Makers' Journal, March, July, 1883. 

8 President's Report to the Fourteenth Session, in Cigar Makers' 
Journal, October, 1881. 



128 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

discussed at intervals, 1 and complaints are still made by the 
local unions working under higher prices. 2 

The Boot and Shoe Workers are not at the present time 
making serious attempts to secure uniform or equalized 
lists, but, instead of this, are seeking to make contracts with 
employers wherein all disputed wage questions in each shop 
are left to arbitration. This policy precludes a general 
movement for equalization or uniformity. But it is not the 
union's intention to accept permanently the present varia- 
tions in prices among union shops. The endeavor of the 
union is to subordinate wage movements to the movement 
for the increase of the number of factories under contracts 
with the union until enough factories shall have been union- 
ized to make it possible for union manufacturers to raise 
wages without losing trade in competition with non-union 
factories. The president has repeatedly declared that a per- 
manent raising of the wage level cannot be secured until the 
union factories are numerous enough to dispel the fear of 
competition from non-union factories. 3 In some local unions 
there is now a desire for more vigorous action against ine- 
qualities in the prices paid in union factories in neighboring 
places, and it is urged that these inequalities tend to reduce 
prices in the better-paying factories; but the conventions 
steadily vote to continue the present policy. 4 

Sectional scales. — Intermediate between the scales for 
single localities and the national scales come a number of 
scales applicable over sections of territory of varying size. 
These are grouped here under the term " district " scales, 

1 Cigar Makers' Journal, July, 1906, p. 9. 

2 Ibid., April, May, 1906; May, July, 1907. The Cigar Makers have 
a national minimum price per thousand for cigars on which the label 
is used (Constitution, eighteenth edition, sec. 156). The greater 
part of the cigars made in most cities find a market within a short 
distance. 

3 This policy was first adopted at the Rochester Convention in 1899, 
and has often been reaffirmed (Proceedings, 1899, pp. 6, 11, 23; Pro- 
ceedings, 1903, pp. 8, 34; Proceedings, 1904, P- 49; Boot and Shoe 
Worker, January, April, 1900; January, February, April, May, July, 
August, 1901). 

4 Proceedings, 1904, p. 19; Proceedings, 1906, pp. 62, 106, 125; 
Proceedings, 1907, pp. 148-149. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 129 

although there are wide differences in the area covered. In 
some cases the area in the price district has embraced over 
half of the territory under union jurisdiction; in others it 
has been but a small fraction thereof. In several unions 
the district scale has marked merely a stage in the progress 
toward a national uniform scale, and in some present in- 
stances also it has the appearance of a temporary or oppor- 
tunist arrangement. In other unions the district is accepted 
as a satisfactory permanent area of scale application. 

Prominent among the unions in which the district was 
only a temporary area of scale application have been the 
Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers, 
the Window Glass Workers, and the Flint Glass Workers. 

The Sons of Vulcan had district scales very early. In 

1867 the union jurisdiction was divided into districts instead 
of into states as theretofore, the purpose being to include 
in each district forges which should be governed by similar 
prices. 1 By 1876 the districts west of the Alleghany Moun- 
tains had each a scale for puddling 2 and an attempt had been 
made to secure a district scale in the East. 3 The Puddlers 
were in general in advance of the rolling branches of the 
iron trade in securing district prices, though the Guide Mill 
Rollers of the Pittsburgh district, at the time affiliated with 
the Associated Brotherhood of Iron and Steel Heaters, Roll- 
ers, and Roughers of the United States,* had made a scale 

1 The national organization of puddlers, the National Forge of 
Sons of Vulcan, was organized in 1862 (Souvenir of the Eleventh 
Annual Reunion of A.A. of I.S. & T.W. of the U. S., 1890). In 

1868 there were five districts. The first included Pittsburgh and vicin- 
ity and Pennsylvania and Maryland west of the Susquehanna. The 
center of the second was at Wheeling, and it ran as far west as 
Columbus, Ohio. The third had its headquarters at Newcastle, Pa., 
in 1868, but in 1869 it centered about Cincinnati ; the fourth covered 
Illinois, Michigan, Indiana, and Wisconsin. In 1868 it included 
southern Ohio and Kentucky also. The fifth was an Eastern dis- 
trict, covering eastern Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey 
(Vulcan Record, I, nos. 2, 4). 

2 Vulcan Record, I, no. 6 (1870), p. 10; Proceedings of Amalga- 
mated Association of Iron and Steel Workers, 1877, p. 65. 

3 Vulcan Record, I, no. 14, p. 13. 
* Organized in 1872. 



130 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

for their district by agreement with their employers in 1872. 1 
In the convention of 1877, the first to be held after the roll- 
ing branches had amalgamated with the puddlers, 2 the presi- 
dent urged upon the several branches the necessity of uni- 
form prices for each district to prevent manufacturers forc- 
ing reductions on the ground that other mills in the district 
paid lower prices, and recommended that the lodges should 
hold district conventions in each district for the formulation 
of uniform district scales. 3 The convention adopted this 
recommendation and inserted an article in the constitution 
to the effect that each district should have a district scale for 
all the mills in the district. 4 The Amalgamated Association 
thus definitely adopted the policy of district scales. 5 

The earliest district scales, however, did not cover all 
branches of work. Uniformity was hard to introduce and 
at first only the fundamental operations were put in the 
scale, and rates provided only for the leading members of 
the crew. 6 Two of the districts, the fourth — in which all 

J This agreement is given in the Appendix to the Proceedings of 
the 1880 convention of the Amalgamated Association of Iron and 
Steel Workers. 

2 In 1876 the Associated Brotherhood of Iron and Steel Heaters, 
Rollers, and Roughers of the United States (organized in 1872) and 
the National Union of the Iron and Steel Roll Hands of the United 
States (organized 1873) joined with the United Sons of Vulcan to 
form the AA. of I. and S.W. of the U. S. The United Nailers 
were admitted at the first convention (Report of Proceedings of the 
National Grand Lodge of the Iron and Steel Heaters, Rollers, and 
Roughers of the U. S., 1876; Proceedings of the Iron and Steel Roll 
Hands' Union, 1876; Proceedings of the Iron and Steel Workers 
of the United States, 1876). 

3 Proceedings, 1877, p. 57. 

4 Ibid., p. 73; Constitution, 1878, Art. XIV. The lodges were to 
try to have the scales signed in district conferences with the manu- 
facturers, and failing in this, to present the scale separately at each 
mill. 

5 The Amalgamated Association adopted the districts of the Sons 
of Vulcan of which there were eight in 1876. The five districts of 
1869 had been retained with some modifications of boundaries and 
three more had been added. 

"Not until 1879 were prices set in the Pittsburgh and Cincinnati 
district scales for such operations as scrapping, shingling, and muck 
rolling (Proceedings, 1880, p. 343; Proceedings 1881, p. 562; Pro- 
ceedings, 1882, p. 802; Proceedings, 1883, p. 1249). 



The Area of the Standard Rate 131 

but a few of the mills were steel mills 1 — and the Eastern 
district, east of the mountains — in which the mills were 
poorly organized — were unable to enforce uniform district 
scales. 2 There were also some lodges outside any district 
which followed as closely as they could the prices of the 
nearest district or those of the Pittsburgh district, as, for 
instance, the Birmingham, Alabama, lodge in 1882. 3 Mills 
which did special work or had special equipment in rolls 
were given special prices differing from the district scale. 
A steel rail mill in Chicago, for instance, where more than 
the usual amount of automatic machinery was used, was 
given a special scale. 4 The Carnegie Bros.' mill at Pitts- 
burgh had special scales for rolling, 5 and there were other 
similar instances. 6 The " Memorandum of Agreement " 
prefacing the scale provided that on mills running on special- 
ties separate contracts might be made between the manu- 
facturers and the rollers. Any manufacturer in the district 
was to be given the same prices as had been extended to any 
other using the same special equipment. 7 

The Window Glass Workers retained for years three scale 
districts with different rates of wages. There had been a 
national organization of the four branches of the window 

1 Proceedings, 1884, p. 1340; Proceedings, 1885, p. 1561. The steel 
mill lodges had been authorized by the National Association in 1881 
to hold separate district conventions, and draw up district scales 
(Proceedings, 1881, p. 712; Constitution, 1882, Art. X, sec. 8). In 
1882 representatives of steel mill lodges held a convention and 
adopted a scale for the fourth district but were not very successful 
in their attempts to establish it. Later another convention was held 
and a reduced scale adoped, but it was not widely enforced (Pro- 
ceedings, 1883, pp. 1183-1194; Proceedings, 1884, p. 1340). The 
union never was able to establish successfully a district or national 
scale for the steel mills. 

2 In 1881, a scale was agreed upon for "Philadelphia and vicinity" 
(Proceedings, 1881, Appendix). Prices in nearby places, however, 
varied considerably from this scale. 

3 Proceedings, 1882, p. 802. 

4 Proceedings, 1884, p. 1320. 

5 Proceedings, 1881, Appendix, " Scale expiring May 31, 1882." 
In the Pittsburgh Price List for 1884-5 this scale appears as " Scale 
for Carnegie Bros.' Mills and mills similar to them." 

6 Proceedings, 1880, Appendix. 

7 Proceedings, 1884, p. 1401. 



132 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

glass trade since 1879 ; x but it was not until 1901 that a 
uniform wage list was reached. In the early conventions 
each of the three wage districts, the Western, which included 
the factories west of the Alleghany Mountains, the North- 
ern, covering Eastern Pennsylvania and New York, and 
the Eastern, confined practically to New Jersey, had its own 
wage committee. After the scale for each district had been 
passed on by the convention, the district conference com- 
mittee obtained what it could in conference with the manu- 
facturers of its district. The Western scale was, however, 
usually followed as a guide by the other districts. 2 The 
Northern scale was generally ten per cent, lower than the 
Western, and the Eastern was lower to a varying extent. 
In 1900 and 1901 both the Eastern and Northern scales were 
seven and one-half per cent, lower than the Western. 3 
There were also minor differences in the scales as to work- 
ing rules. 4 

In most branches of the Flint Glass Workers' Union 5 
sectional scales preceded national uniform scales. The 
earliest uniform scales were adopted for the local unions 
west of the Alleghany Mountains. The Prescription depart- 
ment had a list for local unions west of the mountains in 
1881, which made a list previously enforced by three local 
unions 6 uniformly operative throughout the West. In 1883 

*For several years prior to 1879 the blowers, the gatherers, and 
the cutters each had a distinct organization within the Knights of 
Labor. In 1879 the Blowers' Assembly and the Gatherers' Assembly 
consolidated, and a few months later absorbed the Cutters' Assembly 
in their new organization. The following year they admitted the 
flatteners who had belonged to the Knights of Labor as individuals. 
The national organization of the four subdivisions of the window 
glass trade was then complete (Complete History of the Manufac- 
ture of Window Glass together with a Review of Labor Organiza- 
tions, by Wm. F. Hendrickson, 1898). 

2 Report of the Convention, 1884. 

3 Scale of Wages and Rules for Working, for Blast ending June 
15, 1900; Ibid., for Blast ending June 30, 1901. 

4 Report of Convention, 1884, p. 29; Constitution, 1886, Art. IX; 
Scale of Wages and Rules of Working, for Blast ending June 30, 
1892, for Northern District; Ibid., for Western District. 

5 The American Flint Glass Workers' Union was organized in 1878. 
8 Minutes of Session of 1880, p. 50; Minutes of Session of 1881, 

P. 58. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 133 

the Pressed Ware department in grappling with the problem 
of introducing uniformity in its price lists shrank from the 
proposal to formulate and enforce a uniform list for all 
factories under union jurisdiction, but recommended that 
the local unions of the East and those of the West should 
present uniform lists for their respective sections at the 
next convention. 1 In 1884 the Shade department adopted 
a Western list for certain classes of ware, and the Eastern 
local unions were urged to adopt a similar list for them- 
selves. 2 In the 1887 convention uniform Eastern and West- 
ern lists were urged by the Iron Mold committee as giving 
much greater uniformity than had hitherto been attained 
and as tending toward a national uniform list for that de- 
partment. 3 In all of these departments 4 the sectional lists 
gave way after a few years to national uniform scales. 5 

The sectional lists of the Chain Makers may be con- 
sidered as a step toward desired national uniformity. The 
Chain Makers have different sectional scales East and West 
of Pittsburgh for scarf-link chains and the union hopes 
ultimately to reach a national uniform scale for this work. 6 
The Shingle Weavers have three districts, each with full 
power to adopt its own scale. 7 These district scales are, 

1 Minutes of Session of 1883, p. 57. 

2 Proceedings, 1884, pp. 83-^5. In 1884 the local unions of the 
Ohio Valley and the West also began a movement for uniformity 
in lists in the various departments in general flint glass factories 
under their jurisdiction (Ibid., p. 13). 

8 Proceedings, 1888, p. 25. A Western list had been proposed in 
the 1886 convention (Proceedings, 1887, pp. 85, in). 

4 In 1887 the possibility of giving up uniformity in the list in order 
to secure a higher list in the East than it was possible to enforce 
in the West was suggested to the Prescription department; but the 
suggestion was not followed (Proceedings, 1887, p. 39). 

5 See below, pp. 150-152. In glass bottle blowing and in the pottery 
trade there were for several years separate union price lists for 
Eastern and Western factories, but for most of this time there were 
also separate organizations in these sections, each with a uniform 
list for its own jurisdiction. See below, pp. 155-160. 

6 Proceedings, 1907, pp. 35-36; Proceedings, 1908, pp. 31, 66; Con- 
stitution, 1908, Art. XII, sees. 2 and 3; Proceedings, 1904, pp. 6, 
18, 21. 

7 The Shingle Weaver, January, February, 1903 ; January, 1904 ; 
Constitution, 1909, Art. IX. The three districts are: (1) Washing- 
ton, Oregon, and British Columbia; (2) Michigan, Wisconsin and 
Minnesota; (3) California. 



134 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

however, intended as minimum and not as uniform scales, 
for local unions are expected to demand higher prices where 
conditions are less than normally favorable. 1 The Shingle 
Weavers are moving for a national scale, but the scale de- 
sired is a scale of minimum day rates, for the organization 
favors the abolition of piece work entirely. 2 

Some of the most powerful American trade unions, 
notably the Mine Workers, the Iron Molders and the rail- 
way brotherhoods, use the district as an area in rate making 
with no apparent tendency toward a wider area for the appli- 
cation of a uniform scale basis. While the rates among the 
Mine Workers in each competitive field are not uniform, 
they are derived by the application of recognized differen- 
tials to a basic rate. The competitive district has been the 
unit in rate application since 1898 in the " central competi- 
tive field," which includes the bituminous mines of Western 
Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. 3 Though in 1906 
there was no interstate settlement, the operators of each 
state making agreements separately with the union, 4 and 
though in 1908 the Illinois operators were not included in 
the interstate conference in which the scale was agreed on 
for the other three states, 5 the rates adopted stood in the 

1 The Shingle Weaver, February, 1905 ; Minutes of the Convention, 
1905, p. 12; Proceedings, 1907, p. 37. 

2 See below, p. 200. In 1904 the Meat Cutters adopted a scale 
for the packing centers of the West which included a piece 
price list, and were moving toward a national uniform scale. The 
Longshoremen had maintained for several years prior to 1908 a scale 
of piece rates for unloading ore, coal, stone, etc., at the Lake Erie 
ports, by an agreement with the Dock Owners and Managers of Lake 
Erie (Proceedings, 1905, p. no). This agreement was renewed in 
1906 after a brief strike, but was not renewed in 1908 (Proceedings, 
1907, pp. 19-22; Proceedings, 1908, pp. 21-22). The union has also 
many local port piece scales, as for instance, those for unloading 
lumber at various ports, and for unloading grain at Buffalo. 

3 For an account of the attempts before 1898 to maintain a basic 
rate for the central competitive field and for details of the present 
system, see an article in the Bulletin of the Bureau of Labor, March, 
1904, by F. Julian Warne; also Warne, "The Coal Mine Workers." 

4 Minutes of the Special Convention, 1906, pp. n, 56-92; Proceed- 
ings, 1907, pp. 35-38. 

5 The union favored the renewal of the plan of an interstate con- 
ference for a settlement for the four states in 1908 (Proceedings, 

.1907, p. 39; Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Convention, 1908, 



The Area of the Standard Rate 135 

same relation to each other as in the years when the inter- 
state conferences were in full vigor. 

When the plan for an interstate settlement of the rates 
to be paid for mining in the central competitive field was 
adopted in 1898, neither the union nor the operators con- 
templated the establishment of a uniform rate for mining 
over the whole field. The design was to give " all fields and 
districts fair competing opportunity," which necessarily 
meant different rates, but rates differing in such a way as to 
secure differentials equivalent to the relative advantages or 
disadvantages of geographical position. A uniform basic 
price was adopted for screened coal in Western Pennsylva- 
nia, Ohio, and Indiana. Illinois operators were to continue 
to pay on the " run of mine " or unscreened coal basis, and 
the Illinois basic price was fixed at an agreed upon differen- 
tial below the basic price for screened coal in the other three 
states. The Indiana operators were to have their choice 
of paying on the Illinois or the tri-state basis. 1 

The union grew rapidly after 1898, and in 1903 an inter- 
state agreement similar to that for the central competitive 
field took the place of separate state agreements in the 
" Southwestern competitive field," including the states of 
Missouri, Kansas, Arkansas, and the Indian Territory. 2 
Texas was also included in this agreement from 1904 to 
1906. 3 Outside of these two competitive fields the union 

PP. 30. 355, 366; Proceedings of the Reconvened Nineteenth Annual 
Convention, 1908; Proceedings, 1909, pp. 52-54; United Mine Work- 
ers' Journal, May 14, 1908). 

1 Proceedings of Joint Conference, 1898. The run-of-mine price is 
approximately sixty-one per cent, of the screened-coal price. The 
agreement also provided that if run-of-mine coal was paid for in the 
Western Pennsylvania and Ohio districts, and this was at the option 
of the operator, the price was to be determined by the actual per- 
centage of screenings passing through a uniform screen defined in 
the agreement. 

2 Minutes of the Convention, 1904, pp. 27-28 ; Joint Agreement for 
scale year from September, 1903, to August 31, 1904, the South- 
western Coal Operators and the United Mine Workers of America; 
Joint Agreement adopted June 16, 1906, for period ending March 31, 
1908, for Missouri, Kansas, Arkansas, and Indian Territory; Pro- 
ceedings, 1907, p. 39; Proceedings, 1909, p. 55. 

"Joint Agreement, 1904-1906, the Southwestern Interstate Coal 
Operators Association and U.M.W.A. ; Proceedings of Reconvened 
Convention, 1908, pp. 46, 53. 



136 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

makes agreements for states, and for districts and even for 
single mines when scales of wider application cannot be 
secured. 1 

Within the central competitive field the standard rates 
actually to be paid are derived from the basic rate by the 
application of differentials. In the Indiana bituminous dis- 
trict the rates are practically uniform ; in Ohio there is some 
adjusting of rates from the Hocking Valley rate as a basis. 
In Illinois the rate actually paid varies from the basic rate 
very frequently. The basic Illinois rate, which is fixed in 
connection with the basic rate for the other three states of 
the competitive field, is the rate paid at Danville. The prac- 
tice is to fix the rates actually paid in each of the eight other 
sub-districts of the Illinois district after the Danville rate 
has been determined. Each sub-district has its own admitted 
differential from the Danville rate. These other rates are 
so adjusted as to enable all the fields to compete. Where 
abnormal physical conditions exist, local adjustments are 
made from the sub-district rate. 2 This system of differ- 
entials was established in Illinois in 1898 and there has been 
no material change in it since. 

The Iron Molders were the first union to adopt and 
continuously retain a system of prices with the competi- 
tive district as the recognized permanent unit. Though 
each stove foundry has its separate price list, all prices for 
similar work within the competitive district are the same, 
and the prices of different patterns vary in proportion to 
the difficulty of the work. The system has also a national 
basis, inasmuch as all increases or decreases are percentage 
changes affecting all prices alike, and inasmuch, also, as the 
maintenance of equalized prices in each district is secured 
under a national agreement. The present system of district 
equalization with a national scheme of uniform percentage 

1 Proceedings of Reconvened Convention, 1908, p. 46. 

2 The number of local questions which had to be settled by the 
Illinois Operators and Miners after the adjournment of the inter- 
state conference was given as a reason by the Operators for not 
going into that conference in 1908 (Proceedings of Reconvened 
Convention, 1908, pp. 11, 71, 108; Proceedings, 1909, p. 52). 



The Area of the Standard Rate 137 

changes in existing prices was not instituted until 1892. It 
was preceded, however, by years of striving on the part of 
the union toward uniformity in prices or equalization of 
price lists throughout the entire union jurisdiction, and was 
inspired by a desire for some system of fixing prices on a 
national uniform basis. 

In the circular calling the first national convention in 1859 
the Philadelphia union included "one standard of prices 
throughout the country " as one of the benefits to be secured 
by national organization. 1 In 1866 the Cincinnati local union 
submitted a tentative list as a basis for a uniform price list. 2 
The idea of the uniform list seems to have been slowly 
abandoned with increasing diversity of patterns in favor 
of a national system of equalization. A resolution favoring 
the appointment of a national wage committee to adopt a 
national uniform scale was passed over in the 1886 con- 
vention. 3 In 1887 there was another suggestion for a 
national system of piece prices, but these were to be per 
pound. 4 The president of the union in 1886 welcomed the 
foundation of the Stove Founders' National Defense Asso- 
ciation in the hope that it would help to keep prices 
equalized. 5 

In the absence of a recognized national system of equal- 
ization before 1892, it was the policy of the union to keep 
prices in the different cities as nearly equalized as possible. 6 
The officers believed that progress was being made in this 
direction. In February, 1874, the International Journal, the 

1 " Conciliation in the Stove Industry " by John P. Frey and John 
R. Commons in Bulletin of the Bureau of Labor, No. 62. 

2 International Journal, October, 1866, p. 222. 

3 Proceedings, 1886, p. 21. 

4 Iron Molders' Journal, January, 1887, p. 4. 

5 Proceedings, 1886, p. 4. 

6 In 1867, however, in answering the complaint of the Western 
manufacturers that prices were much higher in the West than in the 
East while the cost of living was not higher, the president of the 
Molders stated that prices ought to be twenty per cent, higher in the 
West on account of the higher cost of living and that there was not 
much more than that difference between Western and Eastern prices. 
He also complained that a manufacturers' association kept prices 
down in the East. 



138 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

organ of the Union, claimed that prices were fairly well 
equalized East and West, though the East paid a little more. 1 
The president of the union in 1876 regretted that some ine- 
qualities existed but denied that there were great differences 
for similar work. 2 In 1882 the Journal, in commenting on 
the demand of the foundrymen of Troy for a reduction on 
the ground that they could not compete with lower-priced 
places declared that prices in the different cities of the United 
States, taking everything into consideration, were as nearly 
uniform as it was practicable to make them. 3 In 1883 the 
Journal repeated that where facilities were equal prices 
were as nearly equalized as they could be. 4 

The movement for a national system of uniform or equal- 
ized prices derived its strength chiefly from the feeling that 
only by uniformity in labor cost could increases in wages 
be secured and reductions avoided. The union position for 
years has been that competition necessitates uniformity, irre- 
spective of the differences in the. cost of living. The editor 
of the Journal in advocating in March, 1875, the equaliza- 
tion of prices all over the country, declared that self-preser- 
vation demanded this course. Employers had to compete 
with each other and they would equalize prices if the union 
did not, but their equalization would be on the basis of the 
lowest rates. He also took the ground that it was unjust 
to a manufacturer to allow his competitor to pay lower 
wages. 5 In the agreement for district equalization with 
the Stove Founders' National Defense Association, equal 
prices for all competitors, irrespective of location or local 
differences in the cost of living, is the principle frankly 
followed. 6 

1 International Journal, February, 1874, P- 259. 

2 Iron Molders' Journal, July, 1876, Report of Thirteenth Session. 

3 Ibid., December, 1882, p. 6. 

4 Ibid., February, p. 9, March, p. 8, 1883. 

5 Ibid., March, 1875, p. 226. See also Ibid., December, 1866, p. 206; 
July, 1876; June, 1880, p. 2. 

6 The same policy was urged by the representatives of the union 
upon the National Founders' Association also. See below, p. 171. 
Something of this same feeling as to the effects of unequal prices 
exists among the molders of light hardware castings for "house 



The Area of the Standard Rate 139 

As early as 1887 the president of the Stove Founders' 
National Defense Association notified the president of the 
Iron Holders' Union, during negotiations for the settlement 
of a strike in St. Louis, that he favored a meeting of com- 
mittees from each organization to settle on a scale of prices 
for the trade for the year. 1 The union favored the plan, 
"but the executive board of the Defense Association was not 
ready to proceed with it then. The St. Louis strike led to a 
general struggle between the union and the Defense Asso- 
ciation, and it was not until March, 1891, that a joint com- 
mittee of the two organizations agreed upon a plan of con- 
ciliation for the prevention of strikes and recommended to 
their respective organizations "that they consider the de- 
sirability of annual agreements for the rate of wages." 2 
In February of the following year an agreement was 
reached that a general rate of wages to hold for a year at 
least should be adopted by the two national organizations. 3 
The prices then existing were to be taken as the established 
prices, except that inequalities were to be removed, and the 
prevailing prices were to be subject otherwise only to uni- 
form changes. These percentage changes might be made 
only at the expiration of each year and only by the confer- 
ence, after request, with notice, from one party. Inequali- 
ties in existing prices within a foundry or between foundries 
in the same district were to be adjusted on the comparative 
basis by agreement between the employer and the local 
union, with final appeal to the national joint committee. 
New work was to be priced locally on the same comparative 

trimming goods." In 1891 a local union of New Haven appointed a 
committee to get in touch with other local unions engaged on that 
class of work so as to arrange for uniformity in prices for the same 
patterns throughout the country. The reason given was that when 
the molders in this line of work asked for an advance in some 
localities they were invariably told by the employers " We can't pay 
more than our competitors" (Iron Molders' Journal, November, 
1891). 

1 Iron Molders' Journal, May, 1887, p. 7 ; Proceedings, 1888, pp. 5, 7. 

2 Proceedings, 1890, pp. 69, 83; Iron Molders' Journal, April, 1891, 
p. 4. For the history of these conferences, see Frey and Commons. 

8 Iron Molders' Journal, March, 1892, p. 4; Conference Agreements, 
Clauses 5, 6, 7, 8. 



140 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

basis, so as to maintain equalized prices throughout each 
district. 1 This system, with amplifications, is still in force. 2 

The size of the competitive districts in stove molding 
varies and their boundaries have never been definitely laid 
down. New England is regarded as a single district as is 
New York, and as is Pennsylvania. In the Central West 
the districts run across state lines, and in the South several 
states are in one district. There is no formal system of 
equalization between the districts. Stoves are shipped from 
one district to another, but in large part these stoves are of 
different kind from those made in the districts into which 
they are shipped. Prices between districts do not vary 
enough to give rise to a demand for formal inter-district 
equalization. An official of the national union states : " There 
may be a stove manufacturer or two who would look with 
favor upon the plan of pricing the molding of stoves on the 
basis of the territory where they are to be sold, because this 
would give them some peculiar advantage, but I know that 
the great majority of stove manufacturers are well satisfied 
with the system as it is to-day." 

The Stove Mounters, who erect or mount the stove from 

1 New work is priced by comparison with work already made in the 
foundry unless those prices are found to be not in accord with com- 
petitive prices in the district (Clause 7, 1892, as amended 1903; Iron 
Molders' Journal, 1903, p. 252). When no similar stoves are made 
in the same shop the prices are to be set by comparison with similar 
stoves made in the district (Clause 14, Conference, 1898; Iron Mold- 
ers' Journal, 1898, p. 212). 

2 The policy of the union is to force all other employers to pay 
the same increases that are paid by the Stove Founders' National 
Defense Association. The membership of this organization in- 
cludes the producers of seventy-five per cent, of the stoves made in 
the United States. In 1898 the Defense Association asked for a 
reduction in prices for 1898-99. It was agreed in the conference of 
1898 that the existing prices were to hold for the following year 
and the union was to do all in its power to prevent any of its mem- 
bers accepting a reduction, but if five per cent, of the union stove 
molders in any district accepted a reduction a new conference might 
be called by the Defense Association and if no alternative was found 
the union would grant a similar reduction to the members of the 
Defense Association. The conference was not called (Iron Molders' 
Journal, 1898, p. 214). In 1899 when it was agreed in conference 
that there should be an increase in prices, the union forced em- 
ployers who were not members of the Association to give the same 
increase (Ibid., 1899, pp. 161, 228). 



The Area of the Standard Rate 141 

the molded parts also have shop piece-lists, which the union 
has attempted to equalize locally for some years. In 1902 
the union entered into an agreement with the Stove Found- 
ers' National Defense Association similar to that with the 
Holders for a system of district equalization and national 
percentage changes. 1 In 1907 the agreement was given up 
after a referendum vote for its abrogation. 2 The union 
tries to keep prices as uniform as it can without such an 
agreement. 

The railroad unions' mileage rates for men in the train 
service are uniform for men in the same class of service for 
each road or system. Certain branches or runs are given 
separate mileage rates, but these are recognized differentials 
from an understood uniform mileage rate to meet differ- 
ences in conditions affecting the actual mileage made. The 
unions are striving for uniformity of rates on all roads in 
the same section, but as yet the basis of negotiation for 
actual mileage rates, as well as the unit of application of the 
agreements establishing the rates is in the main the road or 
system. 3 In the West uniformity between systems has been 
much more nearly secured than in the Southeast and the 
East. There are well understood standard mileage rates 
which are enforced on all the Western systems, except where 
there are special conditions justifying departure therefrom. 
The officers of the Conductors and Trainmen have met 
several times in conference with the general managers of 
the Western roads to settle uniform demands on all these 
roads on such matters as hours of labor, percentage increases 
in the standard mileage rates, and " double-heading." After 
a general agreement is reached in such conferences on a 
wage demand the details of the settlement are worked out 

1 Proceedings, 1903, p. 21 ; Proceedings, 1906, p. 6. 

* Proceedings, 1908, p. 6. 

s The union wage committee is usually representative of all the 
men in that branch of the service under the same general manager. 
Except on the Pennsylvania railroad, which adopts separate sched- 
ules east and west of Pittsburgh, the practice is for each road through 
its general manager to make a schedule of mileage rates in agree- 
ment with the union committee for the road or system as a unit. 



142 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

separately for each road. This practice was begun in 1902, 
In that year an organization was effected of the general 
committees of the Conductors and Trainmen on all the West- 
ern roads. The immediate purpose was common action on 
a uniform wage-increase demand on all of these roads. A 
uniform demand was agreed upon, and secured on one road 
after another. 1 The two unions retained this general com- 
mittee of road committees and since 1902 it has several 
times met with a corresponding committee of general 
managers. 

The railroad unions, particularly the Railroad Trainmen 
and the Railway Conductors, 2 are trying to secure in the 
East the same uniformity that exists in the West, by bring- 
ing up the lower paid roads to the level of the highest. The 
unions hold to the ideal of national uniformity in rates, but 
for the present the task of standardizing rates in the East 
is the immediate practical problem. Uniformity of rates 
on all roads in the same section is demanded by these unions 
not so much because unequal rates afford competitive advan- 
tage as because the unions are anxious to secure as high 
rates as possible for all roads, and because they do not admit 
that there is any good reason why some roads should be 
allowed to pay their men less than others for the same work. 

National scales. — National piece scales are maintained by 
the Flint Glass Workers, the Glass Bottle Blowers, the 
Window Glass Workers, the Potters, the Lace Curtain 
Operatives, the Gold Beaters, the Table Knife Grinders, 3 
the Elastic Goring Weavers, 4 the Wire Weavers, and the 
Tin Plate Workers. The scale of the Iron, Steel and Tin 
Workers is uniform west of the Alleghany Mountains, and 
the Association controls very few mills east of the moun- 

1 Proceedings of the Railway Conductors, 1903, pp. 18-25 ; Pro- 
ceedings, 1905, p. 10; Proceedings of the Railroad Trainmen, 1905, 
p. 10. 

2 The Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, which includes con- 
ductors as well as brakemen and baggagemen, and the Order of 
Railway Conductors act jointly on nearly all roads in negotiating 
with the general manager for rates and working rules. 

3 This union is confined to Massachusetts and Connecticut. 

4 This union has now but two locals, both in Massachusetts. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 143 

tains. The shirt and overall workers of the United Gar- 
ment Workers have a national minimum piece bill, and the 
Hatters have a national minimum bill for stiff hats and have 
voted in favor of a bill for soft hats. The Brushmakers in 
1904 attempted to put in force a uniform scale, but unsuc- 
cessfully. 

The unions which first attained national scales were un- 
ions in highly skilled trades, concentrated in a compara- 
tively small number of localities, such as the iron and steel, 
and glass trades. These characteristics were important 
sources of union strength, and made possible vigorous agita- 
tion for uniformity in wage scales. In such trades also 
differences in piece rates were more likely to be noted, the 
manufacturers in each locality being more on the alert to 
avoid having higher rates imposed upon them than were 
paid in other places. National lists were attained in several 
of these trades shortly after district or sectional scales had 
been well established. These district scales had shown the 
feasibility from a technical standpoint of framing a single 
list of prices to apply to a number of plants in separate 
localities, and served to bring to the attention of manufac- 
turers in the higher rated districts the differences in prices 
between sections. Even before competition between manu- 
facturers in different sections had become keenly felt in 
these trades the manufacturers in the districts with the 
higher lists were averse to paying more per unit for work 
than manufacturers elsewhere. The disinclination of the 
manufacturers in the higher-rated districts to continue to 
pay more than was paid in other districts was one of the 
reasons for the desire of the union to bring the lower-rated 
districts up to the level of the higher. 

The Iron, Steel and Tin Workers obtained a uniform na- 
tional scale for nearly all of the branches of its member- 
ship by 1885. This scale applied west of the mountains 
only; but as the organization was never strong enough in 
the East to maintain a separate Eastern scale for successive 
years, the Western scale may be regarded as a uniform scale 



144 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

for its practical jurisdiction. From the beginning there 
were tendencies toward uniformity in the several district 
scales of the Association. The price for boiling throughout 
the trade had long been affected by the Pittsburgh price, and 
union agreements were made in some districts on the basis 
that prices should be certain amounts more or less than 
Pittsburgh prices. 1 The Cincinnati or third district scale 
for finishing mills adopted in July, 1881, was specifically 
the Pittsburgh scale with ten per cent, added, 2 and the 
Wheeling or second district scale for the rolling branches 
in 1881-1882 was the same as the Pittsburgh scale. 3 In 
the fourth district the manufacturers agreed in 1881 to the 
Pittsburgh scales for puddling and for some of the finishing 
branches. 4 When the nail-plate rollers, pursuant to an in- 
struction of the 1 88 1 convention, met in separate convention 
in 1882 to formulate a uniform scale for nail-plate rolling 
west of the mountains they adopted the Pittsburgh scale as 
the uniform scale. 5 

The convention of 1880 required that all district scales 
should be referred to national committees of their respective 
branches for approval before presentation to the employers. 6 
As a further step toward uniformity, and to make universal 
a practice common in some branches, the convention of 188 1 
enacted that all the other districts should take the scale 
adopted by the first or Pittsburgh district as the basis of 
their scales. 7 In 1882 the first district struck for an ad- 
vance in prices and nearly every mill in the other districts 
became involved. 8 Both divisions of the third district, the 
Cincinnati division and the St. Louis division, soon returned 

Proceedings, 1880, pp. 408, 459, Appendices; Proceedings, 1881, 
P. 799- 

3 Proceedings, 1881, p. 574; Proceedings, 1880, Appendices. 

'Wheeling Scales of Prices, 1881-2. 

* Proceedings, 1881, p. 665 ; Proceedings, 1882, p. 799. 

8 Proceedings, 1881, p. 682; Proceedings, 1882, p. 800. The nailers 
withdrew from the Amalgamated Association in 1885 to form an 
independent organization known as the " United Nailers of America " 
(Proceedings, 1885, pp. 1556-9). 

6 Proceedings, 1880, p. 462. 

7 Proceedings, 1881, p. 693; Constitution, 1882, Art. XIV. 

8 Proceedings, 1882, p. 814. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 145 

to work on the understanding that they were to receive the 
same prices as Pittsburgh when the Pittsburgh scale should 
be settled, the previous prices to hold until that time. 1 The 
second district retained its differential of twenty-five cents 
above the Pittsburgh price when a settlement was finally 
reached for the first, fourth and sixth districts. 2 The settle- 
ment of 1882 thus left the scales for the various branches, 
except the steel converter and furnace men and steel rail 
rollers, 3 uniform west of the mountains, save for the twenty- 
five cent higher rate in the second district for boiling. 

But before uniformity in all branches could be adopted 
as a definite policy by the Association the second, third and 
fifth districts had to relinquish their claims for differentials 
above the Pittsburgh rates. Although both divisions of the 
third district had been compelled to accept Pittsburgh prices 
in 1882, neither the Cincinnati division nor the St. Louis 
division, which became the fifth district in 1882, was willing 
to accept the loss of differentials above Pittsburgh prices 
as permanent. 

The plan of taking the first district scale as the basis in all 
the districts having proved unsatisfactory, 4 the convention in 
1882 enacted that all the district scales for iron mills 5 should 
be referred each year to a national " scale convention " 
which should meet before the regular convention. The 
scales were still to be presented to the manufacturers in 
separate district conferences by conference committees, ap- 
pointed by the president of the national union. 6 As ratified 
by the first scale convention in 1883, the price for puddling 
in the fifth district scale was $6.00 per ton — fifty cents 

Proceedings, 1882, pp. 804-6, 814-17; Proceedings, 1883, p. 1197. 

2 Proceedings, 1883, p. 1085. 

3 The iron and steel rollers had made an attempt in 1880 to 
formulate a uniform scale west of the mountains but were unable 
to agree on more than basic prices (Proceedings, 1880, p. 460; Pro- 
ceedings, 1881, pp. 561-2). The other steel branches failed to 
establish even a district scale; see above p. 131, note. 

* Proceedings, 1882, pp. 946, 967, 799, 800. 

5 The steel converters and furnacemen and the steel rollers were 
empowered to make district scales separately for themselves. 

6 Constitution, 1882, Art. X. 



146 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

above the Pittsburgh rate, and the prices for finishing were 
also higher than Pittsburgh prices. 1 The third district also 
adopted the $6.00 boiling price and prices ten per cent, above 
Pittsburgh for finishing mills, the differential which it had 
attempted to gain in 1881. 2 In both districts the attempt to 
sustain prices above Pittsburgh met with failure. The or- 
ganization was weak in the third district and failed from 
the outset to enforce the scale generally. 3 In the fifth dis- 
trict only four mills signed the district scale and finally, 
with the consent of the national union, the district returned 
to work for practically Pittsburgh prices. 4 

In the scale adopted by the 1884 convention there was 
again uniformity except for the twenty-five cents higher 
price for boiling in the second district. 5 This scale was put 
into operation generally except in the third and fifth districts, 
these districts being badly demoralized. 6 The 1885 scale 
convention agreed to ask for the existing prices, if they 
could be obtained, and to make the price of boiling uniform 
west of the Alleghany Mountains. 7 This made the scale 

1 Proceedings, 1883, pp. 1082, 1197-99. This had been the boiling 
price sanctioned late in 1882 for 1882-3 but it had been difficult to 
enforce it. 

2 Ibid., p. 1179. 

3 Ibid., pp. 1082, 1 179. The district was then very much dis- 
organized. During the fall and winter efforts were made to reor- 
ganize the lodges in the vicinity of Cincinnati, and in June, 1884, a 
meeting was held with the manufacturers and an agreement made 
to observe Pittsburgh prices. The manufacturers objected to the 
words " Third District " appearing in the scale and " Pittsburgh 
Scale " was substituted with the following clause added : " We 
agree to abide by the Pittsburgh Scale of Prices as per agreement 
of November 7th, 1882." 

4 Proceedings, 1884, pp. 1346-48, 1420-23. An attempt was made 
to secure an agreement with the manufacturers to pay the Wheeling 
price of $5-75 for boiling when it was seen that the $6.00 rate could 
not be enforced, but this could not be obtained. 

5 Scales, 1884-5; Proceedings, 1884, pp. 1333^5- The manufac- 
turers in 1883 refused to go into conference with district commit- 
tees for the first, second, fourth, and sixth districts and demanded 
that a general committee deal with them. The general committee 
of the scale convention agreed to do that (Proceedings, 1883, p. 
1078). 

6 Proceedings, 1885, pp. 1560, 1590, 1633, 1639. 

7 Ibid., p. 1551. In January, 1885, the president sent out a circular 
urging the advisability of accepting a reduction on account of con- 



The Area of the Standard Rate 147 

practically uniform. After a failure of the union to arrive 
at an agreement with the manufacturers as a whole, the 
Pittsburgh manufacturers accepted the scale for their dis- 
trict, and the scale so accepted was sent by the union to all 
the sub-lodges in the other districts as the union scale for 
all districts. Any mill in any other district might start up 
under this scale. 1 A uniform scale was thus enforced west 
of the Alleghany Mountains in the iron and iron and steel 
finishing mills in 1885. 2 The scale was then uniform prac- 
tically for as many branches and for as much of the union 
jurisdiction as was ever covered by a single scale. 3 This 
uniformity was, however, obviously brought about by the 
refusal of manufacturers in one district to pay more than 
those in another and not by the union's bringing up the 
lower-priced districts to the level of the higher in order to 
prevent reductions in the latter. 

A uniform scale was never secured for the men in the 
steel converting and steel-rail rolling mills. After the at- 
tempt to establish district scales for them had failed, 4 each 

ditions then prevailing. In this he urged the second district to give 
up its twenty-five cents above Pittsburgh in the boiling price in 
order to make that uniform (Ibid., p. 1579). 
"Proceedings, 1885, pp. 1554, I557-I55& 

2 A change was made after 1885 in the method of determining 
the scale on the union side. On the recommendation of the presi- 
dent of the union, the 1885 convention did away with the scale con- 
vention and thereafter the national convention dealt with the scale 
directly. The convention, which had up to this time met in August, 
thereafter met in June, as the scale year began July first. The nego- 
tiations with the manufacturers were carried on by conferees for 
each division appointed at the convention (Proceedings, 1885, pp. 
1581, 1657-59, 1690; Proceedings, 1886, p. 1825; Proceedings, 1887, 
p. 1969). 

3 Many attempts were made to maintain a scale for the Eastern 
district, but they were not very successful. In some years such a 
scale was adopted for most of the branches included in the Western 
scale (Vulcan Record, I, no. 14 (1874), p. 13; Eastern Scale of 
Prices, for year ending June 30, 1891). In other years a scale was 
adopted for Philadelphia and vicinity (Proceedings. 1880, Appendix; 
Proceedings, 1881, Appendix ; Proceedings, 1887, p. 1951 ; Proceed- 
ings, 1889, pp. 261 1, 2763; Philadelphia Scale of Prices, for the year 
ending June 30, 1890; Proceedings, 1891, pp. 3312, 3560). But in 
1889 when there was a Philadelphia scale, only three milte outside 
of Philadelphia paid the same prices (Proceedings, 1889, p. 2763). 
An attempt in 1903-4^0 formulate an Eastern scale failed because 
of the variations in prices paid (Proceedings, 1904, pp. 7070, 7081-2). 

4 See above p. 131, note. 



148 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

steel plant continued to have its own scale. These differed 
with equipment and other important conditions. 1 Another 
effort for a uniform scale was made in 1887. In that year 
a special steel workers' convention formulated a scale, but 
only as a suggestion toward uniformity. -2 The steel work- 
ers' wage committee reported to the convention in 1888 
that it would not be wise to attempt to enforce a uniform 
scale at that time. This recommendation was followed, and 
separate scales for the various plants recommended by this 
committee were adopted by the convention. 3 This practice 
of adopting scales for the several mills individually on the 
recommendation of a steel workers' wage committee was 
followed by subsequent conventions, 4 The Association lost 
ground in the steel mills after the Homestead strike in 1892, 
and by the secession of the steel finishers, who withdrew to 
form the National Union of Iron and Steel Workers of the 
United States. 5 In 1900 the steel mills were but little or- 
ganized, 6 and the attempt to gain ground failed in the strike 
of 1901. 

Since 1885 the policy of the Association has been to main- 
tain uniform rates west of the mountains where work and 
conditions are similar. If reductions are given to any man- 
ufacturers the same reductions are given to all other manu- 
facturers working under the scale. 7 In 1894, after futile 
conferences with the associated manufacturers, a few manu- 



1 Proceedings, 1886, p. 1825 ; Proceedings, 1887, pp. 1922-4, 1946-7. 

1 Proceedings, 1886, p. 1825 ; Proceedings, 1887, pp. 1946-7, 1922-4. 

2 Proceedings, 1887, pp. 2145-7, 2337 ; Programme of Business of 
Thirteenth Session, 1888, p. 50. 

3 Proceedings, 1888, pp. 2221, 2275. 

4 Proceedings, 1889, pp. 2601-3 ; Proceedings, 1890, pp. 2937, 2940. 

5 Proceedings, 1893, PP- 4282, 4324, 4326. 

6 Proceedings, 1899, pp. 5664-6; Proceedings, 1900, p. 5909. 

T Since 1893 the following clause has appeared in the " Memoran- 
dum of Agreement " : " Whenever deviations from the Western 
Iron Scale signed for by any Manufacturer and the Amalgamated 
Association are made, and evidence is produced to prove it the 
Amalgamated Association and Manufacturers agree to make every 
effort to correct the same, provided the Trains and Furnaces are 
similar, but: if the deviations continue to be tolerated by the Amalga- 
mated Association, all other mills shall receive the same. All Manu- 
facturers and workmen governed by this scale hereby agree not to 
make any deviations from the scale agreed to" (Proceedings, 1893, 
p. 4246). 



The Area of the Standard Rate 149 

facturers signed a scale and this was issued as the Associa- 
tion scale. In September a scale reduced in some particulars 
was signed with another group of manufacturers and these 
reductions were made in the scale for all, including those 
who had signed before. 1 The Amalgamated Association 
has lost many members since 1901, but it still maintains its 
old policy as to uniform scales west of the mountains. Its 
practice is to hold two conferences on the puddling and 
finishing scales after they have been adopted by the conven- 
tion, one with a single company and another with an asso- 
ciation of iron manufacturers, and the lowest items agreed 
on with either become part of the uniform scale. 2 The con- 
vention scales for the sheet and tin division are also taken 
up in conference, usually with one company, 3 the most im- 
portant producer ; but the other producers may have a sepa- 
rate conference if they wish. The same rule holds as in 
the iron conferences — a reduction given to one is given to all. 
Not all the union mills have their rates provided in the 
national scale. A number of mills and departments of mills 
have from time to time been given separate special scales 
because of variations from the regular types. 4 The few 
mills in the East controlled by the union also have separate 
scales. Finally, there are some workers in mills working 
under the uniform scale who do not have their rates spe- 
cifically provided in the scale. Thus some regular hands 
particularly on muck mills and finishing mills are left out 
of the scale. The officials of the national union have often 
tried to secure uniform scales for these workers but have 
failed because of non-uniformity in the amount of work 
they are called upon to do. 5 Many of these workers are 

1 Proceedings, 1894, pp. 4533~7 i Proceedings, 1895, p. 4800. 

'These conferences are held with the Republic Iron and Steel 
Company and the Western Bar Iron Association (Amalgamated 
Journal, June 21, 1906; June 13, 20, July 4, 11, 18, August 15, 1907; 
June 26, July 16, 1908). 

3 The American Tin Plate Company (Ibid., June 29, July 6, 1905; 
June 21, 28, 1906; June 20, 27, 1907; June 25. July 2. 1908). 

4 See, for instance, Proceedings, 1889, pp. 2603. 2786; Proceedings, 
1904, Pp. 701&-20, 7024, 7044, 7048, 7351 ; Proceedings, 1905, pp. 7374, 
7389. 

6 Proceedings, 1882, p. 802 ; Proceedings, 1883, p. 1249 ; Proceed- 
ings, 1888, pp. 2289-90; Proceedings, 1890, p. 3031. 



150 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

union men and are employed by the roller ; these may com- 
plain to their local lodges if they think their wages should 
be raised. A local union may also take up with the em- 
ployer the wage of any of its members not provided for in 
the scale. The wages of these men must go up and down 
with the sliding scale. 1 

As pointed out above, most of the branches of the Flint 
Glass Workers' Union came to adopt national price lists 
after maintaining sectional lists. The Prescription branch, 
which obtained a Western list in 1881, 2 had a national uni- 
form list in 1883. 3 In the same year committees were ap- 
pointed from each of the other branches to consider revision 
of these various lists with a view to greater uniformity. 4 
The feeling in favor of single uniform lists was strong, but 
diversities in methods, in working conditions and in bar- 
gaining power kept the departments from attempting to 
enforce uniform lists in that year, although greater uni- 
formity was introduced in the lists, particularly in the 
West. 5 

In 1885 an attempt was made to secure uniform lists in 
the various departments; but it was on the whole unsuc- 
cessful. The Pressed Ware list was refused by both the 
manufacturers of the Ohio Valley and those of Pittsburgh, 
the situation having been complicated by a struggle by the 
local unions of the Ohio Valley against the substitution of 
piece work for the limited turn system. A compromise list 
was accepted in the Ohio Valley after a protracted strike, 
and Pittsburgh, badly disorganized, was excused from the 
•operation of the list. In the Shade department several of 
the Eastern local unions did not attempt to enforce the list, 
and separate lists were finally put in force in the East. The 

1 There are some workmen who are not provided for in the scale 
largely because they are admitted to membership by only a few 
local unions. 

2 Minutes, 1880, p. 50; Minutes, 1881, p. 58. 

8 Proceedings, 1883, p. 54; Proceedings, 1884, p. 86. This is the 
first continuous national uniform list known to the writer. 
* Proceedings, 1883, pp. 34, 40-41. 
5 Ibid., pp. 55-58. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 151 

Caster Place list was modified for certain manufacturers, 
and the Iron Mold list was withdrawn. The Paste Mold 
list was successfully enforced, and apparently the Chimney 
list also. 1 

The strike brought on by the attempt to enforce uni- 
formity in 1885, and the failure of the movement in the 
branches in which there had been greatest diversity, led 
the union officers to urge for the future a more cautious 
advance. 2 The president advised that the lists be made uni- 
form gradually by starting with a list of the more staple 
articles and adding to them each year until the rates should 
be standard for all wares. But uniformity was attained 
sooner than had been expected. In 1887, at the request of 
the manufacturers, a committee was appointed from the 
Prescription branch to confer with a committee appointed 
by the manufacturers. 3 Trouble arose in the attempt to 
establish the lists of the other departments and conferences 
were held with the manufacturers in these also. As a result 
of these conferences, which were interrupted several times 
by strikes, uniform lists were agreed upon in the spring of 
1888 for the Pressed Ware and Iron Mold and Caster Place 
departments and a considerable advance made toward uni- 
formity in the Shade department. 4 By these settlements 
the union secured uniform lists for all the important origi- 
nal departments in the trade except the Shade department, 
and even here the same end was attained by 1891. 5 

The remaining departments of the Flint Glass Work- 
ers have also, in the main, secured national lists. The 
1887-88 list of the Chimney department was a uniform list. 6 

1 For the history of these attempts, see Proceedings, 1886, pp. 
£-23, 28, 30, 31, 38, 39, 65, 83, 90-92. 

2 Proceedings, 1886, p. 28. 

3 Proceedings, 1887, p. 91. 

4 Proceedings, 1888, pp. 29-31, 57, 123. 

5 Ibid., pp. 31, 39, 116; Proceedings, 1891, pp. 124-126; Proceedings, 
1892, pp. 31, 195- 

6 Proceedings, 1888, pp. 26, 88-89. There are still in the Chimney 
department an " Eastern " and a " Western " list, but these are not 
separate lists for the same work applying only in the East and in 
the West respectively. There are two methods or " styles " of 
working, two ways of organizing the " shop " or team for making 



152 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

The Stopperers succeeded in 1891 in enforcing a uniform 
list. 1 The Cutters and the Engravers were admitted to the 
Flint Glass Workers' Union in 1886, and the Mold Makers 
in 1885. 2 The Cutters then had separate lists in each shop 
in which the piece system was worked. 3 This department 
has never had a uniform piece list; but it has a national 
minimum rate for both time and piece workers. 4 The En- 
gravers adopted a minimum list in the 1887 convention. 5 
The Electric Bulb department and the Punch Tumbler and 
Stem Ware department are outgrowths of the Past Mold 
department. Both these departments have uniform lists. 
The Machine Jar and Bottle Makers' department, an off- 
shoot from the Pressed Ware department, also has its uni- 
form national price list. The Lamp Workers' department, 
instituted in 1891 when these workers joined the Flint Glass 
Workers' Union, has no uniform list. It was never strong 
and is now almost defunct. All the departments, therefore, 
now have uniform lists except the cutters, who work under 
the time system largely, and the Mold Makers who work 
for time wages exclusively. 

The officers of the union stated to the convention in 1888 
that uniformity could not have been secured so early in the 
Pressed Ware and Iron Mold departments but for the 
cooperation of the manufacturers. 6 Yet uniformity was 
attained only after several years of earnest striving by the 
national union. The seriousness of the union's intention to 
establish uniform lists is evidenced by the attempt to en- 
force uniformity in 1885. It was suggested during the 

chimneys, known as the Eastern and the Western styles. Each list 
applies uniformly over trie country wherever its method is worked. 
There is but little difference in the cost per dozen between the two 
methods. There is a similar difference between Eastern and Western 
styles of working in the Electric Bulb department (Proceedings, 
1891, Report of Electric Incandescent Bulb Committee). 

1 Proceedings, 1888, pp. 25, 35, 48, 98, 102-3 ; Proceedings, 1891, p. 
109. 

2 Proceedings, 1886, pp. 69, 71, 77. 

3 Proceedings, 1887, p. 20; Proceedings, 1888, p. 47. 

4 Proceedings, 1888, pp. 102-104. 

6 Proceedings, 1887, p. 81 ; Proceedings, 1888, pp. 35, 93-6. 
•Proceedings, 1888, pp. 29-30, 57. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 153 

conferences in 1887-88, after two months had been spent 
without success in an attempt to formulate a satisfactory 
list for the Pressed Ware department, that a settlement 
could more easily be effected on the basis of the existing 
sectional lists; but the union refused to yield. The presi- 
dent of the union in commenting on this refusal said, " Too 
much time and money had been spent in this and in previous 
years to try to gain uniformity to abandon the pursuit of it 
now when the object seemed to be within our grasp." 

Two of the departments, however, had previously shown 
great reluctance to grant a uniform reduction when forced 
to concede it in one locality. The Pressed Ware depart- 
ment in 1885 failed to enforce a list in the Pittsburgh dis- 
trict which had been adopted for both Pittsburgh and the 
Ohio Valley. The union fought for a long time in the 
latter section before it accepted as a compromise a reduc- 
tion from its original list which made the prices paid in 
Pittsburgh the basis of the Ohio Valley prices. 1 Another 
and very striking case was the attempt of the Prescription 
department in the same year to prevent a reduction in the 
Pittsburgh district from being made general. In 1885 the 
union had to concede ten per cent, "off" the prescription 
list in and around Pittsburgh. There was an understanding 
that this reduction should be kept secret, but by the end of 
two months the news had leaked out in the East and in 
St. Louis, and the manufacturers in those districts demanded 
that the same reduction should be given them. The Eastern 
manufacturers said, to quote one of the union officers, " You 
have made the list universal, and if the Western manufac- 
turers have this advantage you are doing yourselves and us 
an injustice." A special convention of the Prescription 
branches was held in January at Pittsburgh and it was 
voted to give the reduction to all who had not already re- 
ceived it. 2 

Proceedings, 1886, pp. 11-17. 

2 Ibid., p. 40. In the next convention this department refrained 
from adopting a suggestion that a separate list be adopted for the 
East in order to regain the previous prices. See above, p. 133, note. 



154 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

The Window Glass Workers did not attain a uniform 
scale throughout the union jurisdiction until 1901. As has 
been noted, from a few years after its organization in 1879 
the union had a uniform scale west of the mountains, and 
Eastern and Northern district scales which followed the 
Western as a guide and basis. 1 The Eastern and Northern 
scales were regarded as concessions from the dominant or 
regular scale. 2 There was sentiment in the union very early 
in favor of removing the differences between the districts 
if possible. 3 The Eastern and Northern districts, however, 
seem to have been unable to force their wages up to the 
Western level. The wage committees of the various dis- 
tricts sometimes acted together on common affairs, particu- 
larly in the matter of working rules. For instance, in 1888 
the Western and Northern committees joined in making an 
agreement with the manufacturers for the regulation of 
production for the blast of 1888-1889. 4 In 1899 the same 
scale was issued in all the districts, but with provision for 
seven and a half per cent, discount from the rates in the 
Eastern and Northern districts. In 1900 the Eastern and 
Northern districts had the same discount. 5 

When the scale for 1901-2 was to be signed, the union 
glass workers were divided into two rival organizations. 
One of these signed a scale for the blast of 1901-2 uniform 
in all districts. 6 This practice has since been followed. In 
1903 the new organization and the old Knights of Labor 
Assembly 300, signed a "joint scale" for the blast of 
1903-4 which was uniform for all parts of the United States. 
It was specifically provided that no discounts were to be 

1 See above, p. 131. 

2 The Western scale of the Window Glass Workers stood in the 
eyes of the union in much the same relation to the other two scales 
as did the Western scale of the Iron, Steel and Tin Workers to the 
other scales. 

* Proceedings, 1884, pp. 28-29. 

* Proceedings, 1889, p. 8. 

8 Wage Scale and Working Rules, for Blast of 1899-1900; Ibid., 
for Blast of 1900-1. 

6 Circular to members of Knights of Labor Assembly 300, signed 
by J. L. Denny, President, Pittsburgh, August 3, 1901. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 155 

granted to the manufacturers in the Eastern or Northern 
districts. 

A uniform national scale for glass bottle blowing, aside 
from that for the Prescription division of the Flint Glass 
Workers, was not secured until 1890. Its attainment was 
undoubtedly retarded by the fact that prior to 1890 there 
were two unions of green-glass bottle blowers, one an East- 
ern and the other a Western union. The attainment of the 
uniform list is practically the story of the amalgamation of 
the Eastern and Western unions. There is reason to be- 
lieve that there was a union in the glass bottle blowing 
trade in the East in 1842 which was considerably more than 
a local organization. The first strong organization in the 
East after the Civil War seems to have been the Druggists' 
Ware Glass Blowers' League of America, which was prob- 
ably organized in 1866. This union established a uniform 
price list in the East ; at one time there had been three dis- 
trict lists, though these were not printed and so were not 
followed exactly. The union began to hold conferences 
with the employers for the establishment of the Eastern list 
about 1880. 1 In July, 1886, the Eastern union dissolved 
and reorganized as District Assembly No. 149, of the 
Knights of Labor. A part of the membership, dissatisfied 
with this step and with the apprenticeship policy of the 
Assembly, formed a rival organization. In 1889, however, 
this " League " was absorbed by District Assembly No. 149. 2 
There was little or no organization of glass bottle blowers 
in the West until after the Civil War. The united Western 
organization was well established by 1880. 3 This "Western 
Green League" also became a District Assembly of the 
Knights of Labor in 1886. 4 

1 For the facts concerning the early history of organization in the 
glass bottle blowing trade, the writer is indebted to Secretary 
Launer of the Glass Bottle Blowers' Association. 

2 Proceedings of District Assembly, No. 149, Knights of Labor, 
1887, pp. 7-18; Proceedings, 1889, pp. 11-16. 

3 Proceedings of the Green Glass Workers' Association, 1894, pp. 
18, 26. 

4 Proceedings of American Flint Glass Workers' Union, 1886, p. 74. 



156 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

The relations of the Eastern green-glass bottle blowers' 
organization, District Assembly No. 149, Knights of Labor, 
with the Western union, District Assembly No. 143, Knights 
of Labor, were very friendly. The two often met in joint 
session during their annual conventions, but each made up 
its wage list separately. 1 From 1887 on the sentiment for 
a union of the Eastern and Western District Assemblies 
was strong ; but difficulties of detail stood in the way. 2 The 
Eastern Assembly was particularly anxious for consolida- 
tion, as it hoped thereby to secure a uniform list of prices 
and so put an end to the constant complaints of Eastern 
manufacturers concerning the lower Western prices. 3 The 
absorption in 1889 by District Assembly No. 149 of the 
rival Eastern organization which had broken off from it 
three years before hastened the consolidation of the Eastern 
and Western unions, which actually took place in 1890. 4 
The new union was known as the Green Glass Workers' 
Association. One of the provisions of the consolidation 
insisted on by the Eastern union was a uniform scale of 
prices for the united body. 5 In 1895 the name of the union 
was changed to the Glass Bottle Blowers' Association. 
With minor exceptions 6 its lists are now uniform. 

After the consolidation of the Eastern and Western 

1 Proceedings, District Assembly, No. 149, 1887, pp. 7, 43 ; Pro- 
ceedings, 1888, pp. 57-8; Proceedings, 1889, pp. 43, 66, 69, 70. 

2 Proceedings, 1887, p. 45 ; Proceedings, 1888, p. 26 ; Proceedings, 
1889, pp. 25-32, 43, 51, 67. 

3 Proceedings, 1889, p. 23. Contrary to the situation in other 
divisions of the glass industry the glass bottle unions were able in 
the late eighties to secure higher wages in the East than in the West 
(Proceedings, American Flint Glass Workers' Union, 1886, pp. 24, 
33-36, 41; Proceedings, 1887, pp. 25, 39). 

4 That the actual consolidation was effected at that particular time 
was due also largely to the services rendered by President Arring- 
ton of the Western union to the Eastern organization during a 
severe strike and lockout in 1889-90. President Arrington came 
East and took charge of the struggle for the Eastern union at the 
request of its executive board. The executive boards of the two 
unions then effected a consolidation which was later ratified by 
their respective organizations. 

6 Proceedings, 1889, pp. 67, 79. 

"There is, for instance, no uniform list for side-lever press ware 
(Proceedings, 1907, p. 212). 



The Area of the Standard Rate 157 

green-glass bottle blowers' unions the Flint Glass Workers, 
one of whose departments — the Prescription branch — was 
made up of bottle blowers, proposed to the Green Glass 
Workers that the latter should amalgamate with them. The 
Green Glass Workers were unwilling to consider amalga- 
mation at that time, but were willing to confer as to price 
lists on ware made by both associations. 1 As the quantity 
of flint bottles blown from continuous tanks in what had 
been known as green-glass houses increased, an increasing 
amount of the ware formerly made in covered pots in flint 
houses under the price list of the Prescription branch of 
the Flints passed under the jurisdiction of the Green Glass 
Workers. The Flints consequently became more anxious 
that the Green Glass Workers should enforce the Flint pre- 
scription list on all bottles made of flint glass in the houses 
for which they made the wage agreements. The Green 
Glass Workers preferred, however, to follow their own list 
on this ware, 2 but were willing to consult with the Prescrip- 
tion branch of the Flints each year before making up their 
scale. In 1895 they instructed the conference committee to 
confer with the Prescription branch conference committee 
before meeting the manufacturers; the feeling was ex- 
pressed in the convention that the manufacturers got the 
better of both committees by treating with each separately. 3 
In 1897 a proposed plan of amalgamation was defeated 
by the Glass Bottle Blowers' Association, as the Green Glass 
Workers' Union was now called. The two committees had 
discussed a joint price list, but had failed to agree. The 
Flint Prescription branch conference committee then sug- 
gested that their branch of the Flints might join the Glass 
Bottle Blowers, but the latter association was unwilling at 
that time to take them in against the wishes of the Flints. 4 
But from 1897 differences between the two associations as 
to the work over which each should have jurisdiction and 

1 Proceedings, Green Glass Workers' Association, 1892, p. no. 

2 Proceedings, 1894, PP- 167-8; Proceedings, 1896, p. 66. 

3 Proceedings, 1895, pp. 29-31 ; Proceedings, 1896, pp. 12-14. 

4 Proceedings, Glass Bottle Blowers' Association, 1897, pp. 24, 26. 



158 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

over the control of union men in factories in which work 
was done which was claimed by both associations, constantly 
increased. In 1901 the majority of the members of the 
Prescription branch withdrew from the Flints and were 
received into the Glass Bottle Blowers' Association, against 
the protest of the former union. 1 Practically all the union 
"hand" bottle blowers are now members of the Bottle 
Blowers' Association, so that there is practically but one 
union list for such ware. 2 

The Potters have but recently obtained national uniform 
scales. As in the case of the Glass Bottle Blowers, the 
attainment of uniform lists was retarded by the existence 
for years of an Eastern and a Western union. The manu- 
facturers forced a reduction in 1894 and the president of 
the Western union — the National Brotherhood of Operative 
Potters — declared that the acceptance of the reduction by 
the Eastern or Trenton potters had forced the Western or 
East Liverpool men to submit to the same reduction. 3 In 
1895 the Western union attempted unsuccessfully to secure 
a uniform price list. 4 The union went on with its campaign 
and in 1897 persuaded the manufacturers to agree to a con- 
ference for drawing up a uniform list. 5 But the Eastern 
union was not then ready to accept a price list based on an 
average of Eastern and Western prices, since they feared 
that it would involve reductions for them. The Western 
union then tried to secure a uniform list for the West, but 

1 Proceedings, 1901, pp. 89-90; Proceedings, 1902, p. 17. 

2 See above, pp. 37, 42-43. There is a small amount of hand-blown 
ware other than bottles for which both unions now set prices. The 
Flint Glass Workers as well as the Glass Bottle Blowers have a price 
list for machine-blown jars and bottles. 

3 Proceedings of the National Brotherhood of Operative Potters, 
1894, p. 6. 

4 Proceedings, 1895, pp. 37-38. The president of the Western 
union at this time deplored the inequalities then existing, terming 
it one of the greatest evils of the pottery trade. There was a tradi- 
tional scale of prices in the trade known as "the 1885 list," but the 
manufacturers did not follow it and the local unions were not strong 
enough to force them to. There were still many non-union workers 
in East Liverpool. The Trenton Potters also refused to cooperate 
(Proceedings, 1896). 

6 Proceedings, 1897. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 159 

the manufacturers of the West would not accept it. The 
Eastern union also failed to secure an Eastern list. 1 

After the failure in 1898 to secure a uniform list or even 
sectional lists the Eastern union — the Potters' National 
Union of America — voted for consolidation with the Broth- 
erhood, and their local unions were absorbed into the latter 
organization. 2 In December, 1899, the Sanitary Potters, 
who had seceded from the Brotherhood in 1895, again affil- 
iated themselves. 3 The united organization kept on work- 
ing for uniformity by collecting information as to prices 
and trying to win the cooperation of the manufacturers. 4 
In 1900 a uniform list was agreed upon for work on general 
ware, that is, ware other than sanitary, except for decorat- 
ing, kiln drawing, and printing. 5 Some local unions in 
Trenton, however, refused to accept the new list and con- 
tinued to work under the old. This led the Eastern manu- 
facturers to refuse to go on working under the " uniform " 
list. 6 The failure to enforce the scale in the East made it 
difficult in turn to hold the Western manufacturers to the 
scale prices and conditions. 7 The officers kept working to 
secure real uniformity, and after much difficulty succeeded 
in 1904 in enforcing the list in the East and so making it 
uniform. 8 In 1903 the union's persistent attempts to secure 
a uniform list in the sanitary branch of the trade also met 
with success. In that year a uniform list for the most im- 

1 Proceedings, 1898, pp. 5, 6. 

2 Ibid., p. 6. 

3 Proceedings, 1900, p. 8. 

4 Proceedings, 1899, pp. 9, 17. The president of the union in his 
address to the 1899 convention declared that when union prices 
were non-uniform the tendency was toward the lowest prices (Pro- 
ceedings, pp. 9, 17, 43). 

6 Proceedings, 1900, p. 8. 

6 Proceedings, 1901, pp. 7, 81. The president of the union, reply- 
ing in 1902 to the arguments advanced by some members in the East 
that there should be an Eastern and a Western list, expressed the 
opinion that the best policy was one list of prices for work done 
according to regular methods and under ordinary conditions, regard- 
less of section, with extra prices where facilities were not so good, 
in order to enable the men to earn the ordinary wage (Proceedings, 
1902, p. 10). 

7 Proceedings, 1904, pp. 9, 11. 

8 Officers' Reports to the 1905 Convention, p. 5. 



160 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

portant departments of the sanitary branch was accepted 
by the manufacturers, 1 and in 1907 the agreements were re- 
newed in both branches for uniform lists. 2 

The Garment Workers' national minimum bill for the 
shirt and overall branch and the Hatters' national mini- 
mum bill for stiff hats have both been established in recent 
years. The 1897 convention of the Garment Workers in- 
structed its executive board to take the necessary steps to 
bring about a uniform scale in the overall factories. 3 The 
1898 convention took similar action and the executive board, 
following its instructions, secured price lists of all factories 
using the union label. It then asked all factories paying 
less than the average to raise their prices to the average 
level or to give up the label. 4 In the 1899 convention a 
minimum price list for overalls and working clothing was 
adopted. 5 The scale was enforced by the union's action on 
each factory separately until 1905. In August of that year 
the representatives of the union met a committee of manu- 
facturers for the first time, at the request of the latter, to 
confer on the price list. 6 At the present time the scale is 
first considered in joint conference and thereafter ratified 
by the convention. The national scale is a minimum, not a 
uniform scale. Certain manufacturers are required to pay 
higher prices than those in the scale because of inferior 
equipment or facilities, and some local unions which had 
higher scales before the minimum was put into effect, still 
maintain rates higher than the minimum. 7 

The Hatters' minimum wage list is the result of several 

1 Proceedings, 1904, p. 11; President's Report to the 1905 Con- 
vention. 

2 President's Report to the 1908 Convention. A number of mem- 
bers, however, are engaged in work not covered by the. uniform 
scales. 

3 Garment Worker, January, 1898. 

4 Ibid., December, 1898. 

5 Ibid., November, 1899; February, 1900. 

6 Weekly Bulletin of the Clothing Trades, February 3, June 30, 
August 4, 1905; Proceedings, 1006; Proceedings, 1908, pp. 14-17. 

7 Garment Worker, November, 1901 ; Weekly Bulletin, February 
3, 1905; August 16, 1907; Proceedings, 1904; Proceedings, 1908, 
p. 115. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 161 

years of vigorous agitation for a uniform or minimum bill 
in order to prevent competition between districts. In Jan- 
uary, 1895, a resolution was reported in the convention 
reciting that reductions had been caused by differences in 
prices among the districts and emphasizing the need of a 
uniform bill to prevent them. 1 No effective move was made 
in that direction, however, until 1898. In that year there 
were serious complaints that employers in the higher-priced 
districts were using the lower prices in some districts to 
force reductions, 2 and a uniform bill was urged as a remedy. 
A committee was appointed by the executive board to devise 
plans for equalization, 3 and the matter was considered at 
every meeting of the board of directors for two years. 4 In 
1899 the committee presented a minimum list for stiff hats, 
but the board of directors were not ready to adopt it and 
referred the matter to the convention. 5 

A proposal to adopt a uniform bill for soft and stiff hats 
was made in the convention of 1900 and was discussed at 
great length and decisively defeated. 6 But at the meeting 
of the board of directors in April, 1900, charges were made 
that two local unions were maintaining price lists so low 
as to compete unfairly with the other districts. After an 
investigation of these cases a committee was appointed to 
consider the establishment of a minimum or " bottom " bill. 
Following the report of this committee, the board devised 
a minimum list for machine-sizing and finishing and adopted 
a rule that no member should work for less than three dol- 
lars a day. 7 This action was ratified by the local unions by 
a referendum vote. 8 

1 Journal of the United Hatters, August, 1898. 

2 The secretary of the Danbury local union, however, asserted 
that the low prices in that district were for cheap work which was 
not in competition with " fair " shops but with non-union or " foul " 
shops (Ibid., March, 1899). 

3 Ibid., August, pp. 3-^6, September, p. 4, 1898; January, February, 
March, September, 1899. 

4 Ibid., December, 1899, p. 4. 

6 Ibid., November, p. 6, December, p. 3, 1899; April, 1900, p. 4. 
8 Proceedings, 1900, pp. 343-344. 

7 Journal of the United Hatters, May, 1901. 

8 Ibid., August, 1901. 



1 62 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

Complaints of losing work to other districts where lower 
prices prevailed continued and the agitation for a thorough- 
going minimum list of piece prices was kept up. 1 The mat- 
ter was taken up again by the board of directors in March, 
1902, and a minimum bill for sizing and finishing stiff hats 
was adopted which was afterwards ratified by an over- 
whelming vote of the members.- 2 The national bill for stiff 
hats is in fact a minimum bill. Its prices are intended to 
apply only where the conditions are most favorable for pro- 
duction. Where the equipment and other conditions are 
less favorable higher prices are to be adopted locally and 
enforced. The manufacturers have opposed the recognition 
of the minimum bill in framing local bills, on the ground 
that differences in methods and improvements make earning 
power vary under the bill, 3 but the union has consistently 
enforced the bill. 

Encouraged by the success of the minimum bill for stiff 
hats, the advocates of uniformity brought forward in the 
1903 convention a proposal for a uniform bill in all branches. 
Their proposal was referred to the board of directors and 
to the general executive board, and no further action was 
taken upon it. 4 In 1907 resolutions were again offered 
favoring a uniform bill for soft hats, and a committee of 
the convention having the matter in charge reported a bill. 
This was referred to the incoming executive board, 5 but has 
not yet been put in force by the union. The many differ- 
ences in working conditions and in manufacturing processes 
have proved for the present a sufficient obstacle. 

The chief principle discernible in the policy of the piece- 

1 Journal of the United Hatters, May, September, 1901. 

2 Ibid., April, June, July, p. 17, August, p. 17, 1902. The president 
of the union reported to the 1903 convention that the increase in 
wages resulting from the adoption of this bill had been " from 33^ 
to 75 per cent, over the old prices" (Proceedings, 1903, p. 21). 

3 Proceedings, 1907, pp. 43, 49, 109. Proceedings of Board of 
Directors, July 16, 29, 30, 1907; Proceedings of Board of Directors, 
May 11-14, June 18, 1908. 

4 Proceedings, 1903, pp. 46, 75. 

6 Proceedings, 1907, pp. 55, 64, 116-119. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 163 

working unions as to the area of the rate is to make the 
real rate of remuneration uniform over as much as possible 
of the union jurisdiction and more particularly over such 
parts as lie within the same competitive district. It is evi- 
dent that it is not so much one standard rate over the whole 
competitive area or over the whole union jurisdiction that 
is aimed at as an equal rate of remuneration, that is, uni- 
formity of pay in proportion to effort and skill expended. 
This aim is naturally sought through the establishment of 
uniform lists where these seem feasible. But where there 
are numerous differences between shops within the area of 
desired uniformity, in the styles or patterns of the finished 
article, in the methods of subdividing the work at various 
stages in the processes of manufacture, or in the equipment 
or other physical conditions affecting output, the union in- 
stead of attempting to enforce a single uniform list will 
generally maintain many lists of standard prices of limited 
application and attempt to keep the earning capacity under 
all equal. Finally, where there is departure in particular 
shops from the normal patterns or conditions the regular 
price list is not applied. Uniform rates for uniform work 
and proportional variations in rates to meet variations in 
form, in what is to be done for the rate, and in physical 
conditions affecting production is the general union aim. 

II 
Area of Time Rates 

The usual area of the time rate is a locality; in a few 
cases, however, time rates are standard for districts or sec- 
tions, where these districts are well-defined competitive dis- 
tricts or units of negotiation or both. Some unions also 
adopt minimum rates for states, or for the country as a 
whole ; but these rates are in most cases not intended as the 
minimum rate in each locality but are maintained as supple- 
ments to and in support of the actual rates. 

Local rates. — The extent of application of " local " rates 
is usually the jurisdiction of the local union. This is ordi- 



164 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

narily a city or town, and if it be a large city, the suburbs 
as well. 1 Some unions which cannot expect to have perma- 
nent local unions in small places because there is not con- 
stant work of sufficient amount, extend the jurisdiction of 
their local unions beyond the limits of a single city. Among 
the Lathers 2 and the Slate and Tile Roofers, 3 for instance, 
the jurisdiction of each local union reaches half way to the 
nearest city in which there is another local union. Thus no 
territory is outside the jurisdiction of some local union. 
The Steam Fitters also give wide jurisdiction to their local 
unions; 4 all of Maryland, for instance, is within the juris- 
diction of the Baltimore local union. The Structural Iron 
Workers' local jurisdictions are so extensive that there is 
not much territory in the East not under the jurisdiction of 
some local union. 5 The Stone Cutters allow their local 
unions to extend their jurisdiction twenty-five miles in any 
direction, 6 and many local unions have taken advantage of 
this to extend their wage scales over work in neighboring 
places. The Machinists' and the Molders' local unions, too, 
have wide jurisdictions, and extend their control over many 
plants located outside the boundaries of a large city but 
within its industrial influence. 

1 Most of the large unions, like the Carpenters and Bricklayers, 
have in many cities several local unions of men doing the same 
grade of work. The members are thus divided into separate local 
unions for convenience in meeting and in administration. It is 
usual in such cases for all the local unions to have the same rate. 
■Greater New York seems, however, to offer too diverse conditions 
for uniform rates for some of the building trades. The Car- 
penters' rate is fifty cents higher in Manhattan than in the Bronx 
•or Brooklyn and fifty cents higher in these boroughs than in Queens 
and Richmond. The Painters' rate for Manhattan and the Bronx 
is fifty cents higher than for the other boroughs. The Bricklayers' 
rate is lower in Richmond than in the rest of greater New York. 
In 1905 the national officers upheld the Richmond local union when 
proceeded asrainst by the New York executive board for refusing 
to enforce the latter's scale in Richmond (Annual Reports, 1905, 
p. 224). 

2 Constitution, 1909, Art. I, sec. 4. 
'Constitution, 1906, Art. II, sec. 2. 
* Constitution, 1908, sec. 28. 

e Constitution, 1909, sec. 65. 

8 Constitution, 1892. By-Laws, Art. XII, sec. 12; Constitution, 
1909, Art. VIII, sec. 2. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 165 

It is not usual for a local union to maintain more than 
one standard time rate for the same grade of work or for 
the same class of workmen in the same locality. A rate 
which applies to a grade of work or class of workmen in 
one shop in a locality applies, as a rule, in all. There are, 
however, a few exceptions to this rule. Unions having 
members in general contracting shops and in railroad shops 
in the same locality, as the Machinists, the Blacksmiths, and 
the Boilermakers, often have two sets of rates in force, one 
for the contract shops, the other for the railroad shop or 
shops. The rates for the latter are arranged separately 
with each railroad, and these shops are for rate-making 
purposes not considered as in the same group with the gen- 
eral contracting shops. The rates the unions may secure 
for the railroad shops are the rates paid by the road in all 
its shops; the railroad, not the locality, is the unit of col- 
lective settlement. 1 The railroad rate often differs from 
the local rate; in the West it is likely to be higher, in the 
East lower. If there are shops of more than one road in 
the same town the rate for each is fixed separately, but it 
is usually the same in amount; important differences are 
infrequent and are due to exceptional conditions in the rail- 
road shops. 

Sometimes a local union agrees with different shops in 
the same locality for different minimum rates. This is gen- 
erally because the union is moving for a higher minimum 
throughout the locality, and has only succeeded in part. 2 

* Other unions whose members are employed to some extent in 
railroad shops do not make identical agreements for their men 
in all the shops of a railroad, but leave their rates to local adjust- 
ment. Even in these cases the rates for railroad and for other 
work are not infrequently different. The Painters, for instance, 
often have different rates for the railroad shops. The work is 
more specialized than general work and the rates are usually 
graded. The Molders, on the other hand, usually hold their men 
in the railroad shops to the local rate, but there are comparatively 
few molders working under the time system in railroad shops. 

2 The minimum, however, is _ regarded by the Machinists merely 
as the lowest rate the local union will accept in an agreement with 
a local employer. Higher minimum rates are frequently main- 
tained for particular firms, usually because of peculiar conditions 



1 66 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

Many unions, however, when establishing a higher rate re- 
fuse to allow their men to remain even temporarily in some 
shops at the lower rate. Occasionally, also, local unions in 
the garment and shoe trades when making separate agree- 
ments in each shop for piece prices in branches which are 
predominantly piece-working, insert minimum rates for the 
time workers which are not uniform in all shops. This 
lack of uniformity is also intended to be but temporary and 
is due to weakness or to peculiar circumstances. The gen- 
eral rule among the local unions with a minority of time 
workers, as, for instance, some of the local unions of the 
United Garment Workers, the Metal Polishers, and the 
Boot and Shoe Workers, is to maintain uniform time rates 
for the locality even though the piece rates be shop rates. 

Sectional rates. — There are a few cases in which time 
rates fixed for districts or sections embracing many localities 
are the rates actually ruling as standard in each locality. 
The most important instances are those of the Seamen's and 
the Longshoremen's rates on the Great Lakes and the 
Miners' rates for "inside men" in the central competitive 
field. The Lake Seamen's union maintains uniform scales 
in all Great Lakes ports for seamen, marine firemen, and 
marine cooks and stewards. 1 For several years prior to 
1908 these rates were secured by agreements with the em- 
ployers' associations, but in 1908 the agreements were not 

removing them from competition with the general contracting 
shops. Agreements are often made with breweries, for instance, 
calling for a higher rate than that for the contracting shops. In 
Baltimore a distinctly higher minimum rate is obtained from a 
company making caps for beer bottles, though apparently no greater 
efficiency on the part of the men is required. This practice has 
probably grown out of their dealings for separate minimum rates 
with the railroads. 

1 The Seamen have some port rates on the Lakes for members 
employed on barges, towboats, and other such vessels, belonging to 
one port rather than moving from port to port. On the Atlantic 
coast the seamen have port rates only, but these are as a matter 
of fact uniform. The firemen's port rates on the Atlantic coast are 
not uniform, and the cooks and stewards in 1908 had none. On the 
Pacific coast the same rates are maintained at all ports and secured 
by agreements, though the rates at each port differ according to 
the ports for which the vessels are to be cleared. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 167 

renewed. 1 The Marine Engineer's Beneficial Association 
also maintains uniform rates for the Great Lakes. 2 

The Longshoremen since 1905 have maintained by agree- 
ment with the Lumber Carriers' Association uniform rates 
per hour for loading lumber on the Great Lakes. The pres- 
ent arrangement was preceded by separate agreements for 
the lumber loading locals of Lake Superior and those of 
Lakes Huron and Michigan. 3 The "marine" branches of 
this union, namely, the Licensed Tugmen's Protective Asso- 
ciation, the Tug Firemen's and Linemen's Protective Asso- 
ciation, the International Brotherhood of Steam Shovel and 
Dredgemen, the International Brotherhood of Dredge 
Workers, and the Surface Rock and Drill Workers, have 
rates secured by agreements with employers' associations 
and individual companies which approach closely to uni- 
formity, but are not yet identical for all ports. Other minor 
branches of the Longshoremen have many separate port 
rates secured by local agreements. 4 

The Miners' time rates for men working inside the mines, 
such as track-layers, drivers, cagers and timbermen have 
been uniform for the central competitive field since 1898. 
The rates for " outside" day men, carpenters, blacksmiths, 
engineers, and dynamo men, do not have the same uni- 
formity. The Illinois district has a state minimum scale for 
"outside" men, but the local rates in many places are 
higher. In Indiana there are considerable differences be- 
tween the scales north and south of the line of the Balti- 

1 Agreement between the Lake Seamen's Union and the Lake 
Carriers' Association, the Lumber Carriers' Association, for the 
season of 1907 ; Agreement, the Marine Cooks' and Stewards' Union 
of the Great Lakes, 1907. 

2 Wage and Crew List for Steamers operating on the Great Lakes, 
effective during season of 1908, the Marine Engineers' Beneficial 
Association. 

3 A uniform wage scale at all the ports for the loading of lumber 
was first attained in 1905 by extending the Lake Superior scale to 
Lakes Huron and Michigan (Proceedings, 1905, pp. yy, 79; Proceed- 
ings, 1906, p. 16). 

4 Proceedings, 1905, pp. 82-98; Proceedings, 1908, p. 16. This 
union is weak on the Atlantic coast and what rates it has there 
are port rates. 



1 68 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

more and Ohio Railroad, the northern rates being appre- 
ciably higher. In Ohio the " outside " day scales are entirely 
local. 

An approach to a system of sectional time rates is found 
in the railroad yard service. The wage rates for yard men 
— engineers, firemen, conductors and brakemen in the 
switching service — are established in the same agreements 
as the rates for the men in the train service. The facts that 
the road or system is the unit of negotiation and settlement 
and that the mileage rates for the members of the same 
unions in the train service are uniform for the road or sys- 
tem, are naturally influential toward uniformity in the yard- 
service rates. 1 There is much greater uniformity on most 
roads in yard rates in different cities than in the rates for 
any one of the building-trade unions in the same cities; 
but there is not yet the same matter-of-course uniformity 
that is found in the train-service mileage rates. 

The railroad unions are striving for uniformity in yard 
rates, not only on the same road but throughout the country. 
At present there is much more non-uniformity in the East 
than in the West. Some of the non-uniformity is due to the 
fact that many yards, particularly in smaller cities are re- 
garded as " second " or " third class " yards, that is, they 
do not require the same experience or exertion as the larger 
yards. These differences do not, however, account for all 
of the differences in rates. After years of endeavor toward 
uniformity the rates for points west of Buffalo and east of 
Chicago are in general one cent an hour less than rates at 
Chicago, 2 and rates east of Buffalo are two cents less than 

1 On a few roads the negotiations for the yard conductors and 
brakemen, or " switchmen," are carried on by the Switchmen's 
Union of America, which does not admit men in other branches 
of the service. Where the majority of the men in this branch 
of the service belong to this organization its committee carries on 
the negotiations and makes the settlement for all the men on the 
road. On roads where the majority of the switchmen belong to 
the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen the latter organization 
negotiates and settles for all. The Brotherhood of Railroad Train- 
men also includes trainmen and conductors in the train service. 

2 The Chicago rates have for years been taken as the " standard " 



The Area of the Standard Rate 169 

those at Chicago. There are several roads in the East which 
have lower rates at certain points than these. Roads tra- 
versing a long east to west territory still have three or four 
or even more yard rates and these differences do not corre- 
spond to differences in the work done. 

There is even less approach to uniformity on the same 
road in the rates for men in railroad shops, for instance, 
machinists, boiler makers, and blacksmiths. But here also 
the road is the unit of negotiation and settlement and the 
unions are moving toward uniformity for each road and sec- 
tion, and have secured rates more nearly uniform than the 
local rates in the same trades in other than railroad shops. 
The usual practice is for the railroad-shop local unions in 
each of these trades on the same road to form a " district 
council " for united action in wage matters. The wage de- 
mands are nearly always determined upon by the council 
as a unit and though they may be presented locally in the 
first instance to the master mechanics, the settlement is made 
for the road as a whole with the superintendent of motive 
power, or, more often, with the general manager. The 
minimum rates to be paid, however, are often set forth spe- 
cifically for each city and may vary four or five cents an 
hour on the same line or system. 1 

The practice of dealing with the roads as units, instead 
of for each shop separately, is comparatively recent in the 
experience of the railroad-shop unions. The first railroad 
" district " of this kind was organized by the Machinists in 
1892. It did not prove so successful at first that the union 
was encouraged to introduce it widely. 2 After several years 
the district idea was taken up again, under a new plan of 
organization, and more successfully. The system spread 

for yard rates. Eastern rates are lower and Western rates are as 
a rule higher than the " Chicago standard." Denver is two cents 
higher than Chicago. 

1 See for instances : Machinists' Monthly Journal, 1906, passim ; 
The Journal of the Brotherhood of Boiler Makers and Iron Ship 
Builders, 1907, pp. 170, 269, 1907; Ibid., p. 123, 1908; Blacksmiths' 
Journal, January, March, 1907; February, March, May, 1908; Rail- 
way Carmen's Journal, July, 1908, pp. 14, 359. 

2 Proceedings, 1893, pp. iv, ix, xxx. 



170 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

rapidly, particularly in the West. By 1904 all of the rail- 
road shops west of the Missouri belonged to districts. 1 

The Blacksmiths and Boiler Makers, particularly the 
former, have followed the lead of the Machinists in this 
matter.- The Railway Carmen are also working for uni- 
form "grand" district rates. 3 The Car Workers have re- 
cently secured agreements with a number of roads and the 
Painters are striving for road agreements to replace sepa- 
rate shop settlements. The Machinists, who introduced the 
" district " system, are now working for sectional districts 
with the intention of introducing uniform working condi- 
tions and hours, and, as far as possible, uniform wage rates 
in each section. Progress has been made in dealing simul- 
taneously with the large Western roads and in getting 
agreements for uniform shop conditions; but such uni- 
formity does not yet embrace the rate. 4 Rates in the North- 
east are lower and present more variations than elsewhere 
in the country. 

Soon after the national union of Meat Cutters and Butcher 
Workmen was organized, the officers began to work for a 
uniform wage scale, 5 but urged caution in attempting to 
secure this. The 1902 convention favored a uniform scale, 6 
and by 1904 it was felt that the time had come to adopt and 
enforce it. A uniform scale of rates was accordingly 
adopted by the 1904 convention for the various branches 
of the union for the packing centers of the West. This was 
submitted first to the Chicago packing houses and in the 
strike which resulted the union was so badly defeated that 
it gave up the design of enforcing a uniform scale. 7 

1 Machinists' Journal, 1903, p. 302; 1904, p. 325. 

2 Blacksmiths' Journal, January, p. 26, July, p. 10, September, 
PP- 33, 34, October, p. 22, November, p. 13, 1903'; Proceedings, 1903, 
p. 10; Proceedings, 1905, pp. 10, 13; Proceedings, 1907, pp. Z7, 48-9. 

3 Proceedings, 1907, pp. 18, 54. 

4 Proceedings, 1905, p. 1026. Machinists' Monthly Journal, 1906, 
pp. 714-18. Proceedings, 1907, p. 84. 

6 Official Journal, December, 1900; January, 1901; Proceedings, 
1902, pp. 25, 35. 

6 Proceedings, 1902, pp. 25, 35^50. 

7 Proceedings, 1904, pp. 34, 89-90, 92-3 ; Proceedings, 1906, pp. 7, 
12. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 171 

The Iron Holders have long looked favorably upon the 
idea of uniform sectional time rates, although they have 
never put such rates into effect. The rate in a given city 
is in practice affected by and affects the rates in other cities. 1 
In the conferences between the National Founders' Associa- 
tion and the representatives of the Molders relative to a 
national agreement both sides agreed to the general prin- 
ciple of a national form of agreement with sectional wage 
rates. It was agreed in the conference of October, 1902, 
that if it were found impracticable to have one national rate 
for each class of foundries the membership of the National 
Founders' Association should be divided into districts and 
a standard rate agreed to for each. 

But the union and the employers could not agree on the 
extent to which the rate should be uniform within the dis- 
tricts. The employers wished the rate to be subject to a 
deduction outside the large cities based on differences in 
cost of living, to be not less than twenty-five cents a day. 
The union representatives opposed such a differential in 
favor of employers in the smaller cities, taking the ground 
that it was desirable to make labor cost as nearly uniform as 
possible in order to place all employers on the same basis. 
They took the position that this consideration should out- 
weigh differences in the cost of living, a principle which was 
recognized in the agreement between the union and the 
Stove Founders' National Defense Association. The union 
steadily refused to give way on this point. 2 

National rates. — Several unions maintain national time 
minimum scales. In some instances these national rates are 

1 The Molders' representatives in a conference with a committee 
of the National Founders' Association in 1900 declared that if they 
secured an increase in the rate in Chicago they hoped to secure 
the same increase in other cities. Cincinnati was mentioned as 
one of the cities in which the same rate as Chicago could be secured 
(MS. Report of Proceedings of Joint Conference Committee of 
the National Founders' Association and Iron Molders' Union, De- 
troit, Mich., June 14-16, 1900; MS. Report of Conference, Montreal, 
July, 1900). 

2 Iron Molders' Journal, April, 1901, p. 191 ; MS. Minutes of Con- 
ference, October, 1902. 



172 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

intended to be observed only as minimum rates by the local 
unions, which are expected to maintain local minimum rates 
as much in advance of the national rates as they may be able 
to secure. There are a few Cases, however, in which the 
national rates are the rates actually governing — are, in fact, 
the standard rates in each locality. A few unions maintain 
national scales because much or all of the work in their 
trade is done by members travelling from city to city in 
continuous employment of one firm or individual. The 
Theatrical Stage Employees have a national scale for men 
travelling with theatrical companies in addition to local 
scales for men in the employ of local houses. The Bill 
Posters have a national scale for men travelling with cir- 
cuses. The Compressed Air Workers have a uniform agree- 
ment for all contractors which includes a scale of minimum 
rates. The Bridge and Structural Iron Workers have a 
national scale for bridge work outside the jurisdiction of 
any local union. The rates in the larger cities are for the 
most part higher than this national rate. 

National scales are also found in several small trades 
which are concentrated in a small number of places. The 
Machine Textile Printers, the Print Cutters, and the Ma- 
chine Printers and Color Mixers thus maintain national 
scales and national scales alone. 1 The Mold Makers' de- 
partment of the Flint Glass Workers' Union has a national 
time scale, following the lead of the piece-working branches. 
The Saw Smiths also maintain a national scale to the ex- 
clusion of local scales, though the membership of the union 
is not sectionally concentrated, and in some of its local 
unions the modal wage is above the national minimum. 

National time rates which are intended to be observed 
only as minimum rates by local unions in establishing stand- 
ard rates for their local jurisdictions and which do not pre- 
clude the establishment of higher rates by the local unions 
are comparatively rare. Such rates are maintained by the 

1 The two last mentioned unions establish their scales after confer- 
ences with the association of wall paper manufacturers. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 173 

Granite Cutters, the United Garment Workers, 1 the Coop- 
ers, 2 the Stove Mounters, 3 the Lithographers, 4 and the 
Leather Workers on Horse Goods. 5 For the most part 
competition in these trades is much more than local and 
lower rates in some localities affect the rates in others un- 
favorably. The Shirt, Waist, and Laundry Workers and 
the Cloth Hat and Cap Workers have also adopted national 
minimum rates, but these are low rates, designed to bring 
up the rates in certain poorly paid branches; they have no 
appreciable effect on the wages of the great majority of the 
members. A few unions, as for instance, the Printers, the 
Carpenters, and the Wood Workers, for the same reason 
require the payment of a national minimum time rate as 
a condition for the use of their union labels. 6 

The Granite Cutters' Union is the only important union 
among the building trades which maintains a national mini- 
mum rate that is high enough to exert influence upon any 
considerable number of local standard rates. It is also one 
of the very few among the building-trade unions in which 
competition between localities has long presented a difficult 
problem in fixing rates. The maintenance of a national 
minimum to be observed by the local unions in determining 
standard rates is a compromise measure adopted after years 
of striving for a national uniform rate. When the national 

1 Garment Worker, November, 1901 ; Proceedings, 1901 ; Proceed- 
ings, 1906; Proceedings, 1908, pp. 73, 95. This minimum rate is for 
the cutters. 

2 The Coopers' minimum is for men on machine-made barrels. 
The union since 1905 has had a national agreement with the 
Machine Coopers Employers' Association covering this class of 
work (Coopers' Journal, November, 1906; September, 1908, pp. 538, 
54^-3). 

3 Constitution, 1908, Art. IX, sects. 5 and 6 ; this is a predominantly 
piece-working union. 

4 Constitution, 1906, Art. XVI. 

5 Constitution, 1907, Resolutions ; Leather Workers' Journal, June, 
1907, P- 639. This applies also to men working piece work. 

6 Barnett, p. 142; Proceedings of Brotherhood of Carpenters and 
Joiners, 1900, p. 73; Proceedings, 1902, p. 123; Constitution, 1907, sec. 
219; Proceedings of the Amalgamated Wood Workers, 1903; see also 
Spedden, " The Trade Union Label," in Johns Hopkins University 
Studies in Historical and Political Science, Ser. XXVII, No. 2, 
PP. 55, 56. 



174 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

union was organized in 1877, one of its main objects, if not 
the main object, was the establishment of a uniform rate of 
wages. The constitution adopted in that year provided that 
there should be an annual congress of representatives from 
each state in which there were branches, to fix " the standard 
of wages," which, upon ratification by the membership, was 
to apply to all branches. 1 Before the year was out several 
of the local unions began to entertain doubts as to the wis- 
dom of attempting then to enforce a uniform rate. The 
number of places working under the piece system appeared 
an obstacle to some and others saw the difficulty of raising 
rates in the more poorly paid localities. 2 However, the 
branches voted in December against postponing or giving up 
the meeting of the congress, 3 and in February it met in 
Boston to establish " a standard rate of wages and bills of 
prices for piece work if found practicable." 4 

The congress decided that it would be " injudicious " to 
attempt to enforce a uniform piece list and that each locality 
should set its own piece prices subject to approval by an 
International committee. This action Was in accord with 
the recommendation of the committee of the congress which 
had the matter of the uniform wage in charge. The same 
committee recommended also that the congress adopt a 
"minimum standard" of two dollars and a half per day; 
but the congress instead passed a resolution " that a stand- 
ard day's wage should not now be established because of 
the inability of the union to enforce a demand for any fixed 
price." It urged the members to labor " for full and com- 
plete organization of the union so that the union cannot 
only make but enforce a demand for a standard of wages." 5 

1 Constitution, 1877, Art. X. This standard rate was to apply 
to all branches " except in malarious climates, or where the expense 
of living is above the average," the national union to determine in 
what places more than the standard should be paid and the amount 
of the excess (Granite Cutters' Journal, July, 1877). 

2 Granite Cutters' Journal, September, October, November, De- 
cember, 1877. 

8 Ibid., December 31, 1877. 
* Ibid., February, 1878. 
6 Ibid., February, 1878. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 175 

The constitution was then amended so as practically to give 
the branches power to establish their own wage rates. 1 

After the failure of this movement for a uniform rate, 
competition made itself felt between the branches. There 
was a great deal of complaint from the branches in cities 
outside of New England of the low rates in force in the 
New England quarrying centers, and in Quincy in particular. 
These low rates, it was contended, induced employers to 
bring in stone from New England with as much of the cut- 
ting as possible done before shipment, and also to resist 
demands for rates higher than those paid in New England. 2 
There were complaints, too, from some New England towns 
that their rates were kept down by the lower rates of other 
local unions in that section. In 1886 a movement was inau- 
gurated for a uniform bill for New England. 3 Although it 
was pointed out that there would be grave, if not insur- 
mountable difficulties in formulating a uniform piece bill 
for New England the idea met with general favor. 4 A con- 
gress of the New England local unions was called to meet 
in Boston to establish a uniform bill, but the attempt was 
not successful. 5 Physical difficulties prevented the formu- 
lation of an acceptable piece bill and differences in prevail- 
ing time rates of wages were too great for the enforcement 
of a single standard. Shortly after this an attempt to agree 
on a uniform piece bill for the state of Maine also met with 
failure. 6 

Complaints of the injurious effects of the lower rates in 
force in other places continued to come in during the fol- 
lowing years, 7 and occasional suggestions were made for a 
national uniform rate or a national minimum bill or time 

1 Constitution, 1880, Art. X. 

2 Granite Cutters' Journal, May, September, 1881 ; January June 
1883; May, 1886. 

3 Ibid, July, 1886. 

4 Ibid, September, October, November, December, 1886; February 
1887. 

6 Ibid, March, 1887. 

6 Ibid, August, 1889. 

7 Ibid., March, April, May, 1887; August, 1889; November, 1891 ; 
June, 1893 ; April, June, 1894 ; March, April, July, August, 1896. 



176 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

rate as a remedy. 1 Late in 1896 a proposal was put before 
the branches for a national minimum of three dollars. 2 The 
proposal was not welcomed by some of the New England 
local unions. The Quincy branch opposed it outright, and 
the Concord, New Hampshire, branch wished to substitute 
a minimum of two dollars and seventy-five cents. 3 But in 
the spring of 1897 the constitution was revised and a provi- 
sion inserted that after 1900 all bills of prices should be 
established on the basis of a minimum wage of not less than 
three dollars a day. 4 

In 1900 the general sentiment for the enforcement of the 
three dollar minimum was strong. The Western branches 
particularly urged the New England local unions to stand 
fast for the national minimum in their negotiations with 
employers. 5 But some of the New England local unions 
made settlements which left some members below the three 
dollar rate. 6 The official journal of the union declared, 
however, that the three dollar minimum was only tem- 
porarily laid aside and that the union would continue 
struggling for it until it was observed everywhere. 7 In 
1903 many New England branches renewed their agree- 
ments; but all did not secure the national minimum. 8 Fi- 
nally in the settlements of the spring of 1905, the last places 
were brought into line. 9 

The adoption of the national minimum has thus had a 
direct influence in bringing up the rates of the more poorly 

1 Granite Cutters' Journal, January, 1887; November, 1890; Febru- 
ary, June, 1891; April, 1894; November, 1896. 

2 Ibid., December, 1896; January, 1897. 
8 Ibid., February, March, 1897. 

4 Ibid., June, 1897. Constitution, 1897, sec. 198. The decision to 
establish a national minimum was undoubtedly influenced by the fact 
that piece work had been given up in many places in the years 
immediately preceding. In 1897 the majority of the branches out- 
side New England were on day work almost exclusively and had 
minimum rates of three dollars or more. 

5 Ibid., January, February, 1900. 

6 Ibid., May, 1900; June, 1908, p. 6. 

7 Ibid., June, December, 1900. 

8 Ibid., January-April, 1903. 

9 Ibid., January, February, May, B905. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 17 7 

paid branches. According to a statement made in the Gran- 
ite Cutters' Journal of August, 1908, in more than half the 
branches the minimum rate is identical with the national 
minimum. But the enforcement of the national minimum 
has not put an end to the complaints that several New Eng- 
land branches by not establishing higher rates are holding 
back other cities from securing higher wages. 1 A national 
uniform rate is still occasionally suggested, but it does not 
seem likely that one will soon be attempted. 2 During 1908 
there was a revival of the agitation within the union for a 
uniform New England rate to prevent employers "playing 
off" one place against another to keep rates low in all. 3 

Similar in purpose to the national minimum of the Gran- 
ite Cutters are the state minimum rates maintained by a few 
unions, particularly the Granite Cutters and the Stone Cut- 
ters, the two unions in the building trades in which most is 
heard of competition between places. These state rates are 
not necessarily the standard rates actually established in 
each locality ; in many places the standard is higher than the 
state minimum. In addition to preventing any local union 
having a rate below a fixed point the state minimum pro- 
vides a rate for work done outside the jurisdiction of any 
local union. 

Agitation among the Stone Cutters' branches in Texas for 
a state minimum began as early as 1894. The chief reason 
was a desire to put an end to low wages on "jobs" just 
outside the jurisdiction of the high-rate towns. 4 A state 
minimum rate was not established in Texas, however, until 

1 Granite Cutters' Journal, June, 1906; June, November, 1907; 
January, February, April, 1908. 

2 Ibid., June, 1906; October, 1907. 

3 Ibid., February, May, June, July, August, 1908. Manchester 
(N. H.) and Concord (N. H.) have the same bills, except for one 
clause (Agreements, 1905-8). The national minimum does not 
apply to machine polishers. In 1907 the Concord machine polishers 
agreed with their employers that they were to have a three dollar 
minimum if Barre and Quincy secured it (Granite Cutters' Journal, 
June, 1907). 

4 Stone Cutters' Journal, June, July, 1894. 

12 



178 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

1899. 1 The feeling for state rates grew in 1898 and 1899, 2 
and the national convention in 1899 adopted a resolution 
urging each "state or province" to establish a minimum 
rate of wages. 3 The state rates established since then have 
been mostly in the West and South. 4 Among the Granite 
Cutters, Missouri had a state scale in May, 1896, 5 Oregon 
had one in 1899, and California established a state rate in 
the same year. 6 As among the Stone Cutters the state rates 
are confined to the West and South where the number of 
branches in a state is not large and the conditions are more 
uniform than in the East. The Bricklayers have also re- 
cently adopted a " uniform " state rate in California. 

Conflict of rates. — Interesting questions have arisen in 
the use of time scales as to which of two rates ought to gov- 
ern in cases in which a member of one local union is taken 
by his employer to work in the jurisdiction of another local 
union, or work is shipped from one local union to be finished 
or put in place in another. It often happens in the building 
trades that an employer brings a union man from his home 
city into another city in which the union rate is different. 
It frequently happens, too, that an employer buys from 
another city in which the union rate is lower woodwork, 
cut stone or granite, or metal work partially or wholly pre- 
pared for use in a building, which might have been prepared 
in the city where it is used. In these cases the question has 
been raised as to which rate should be enforced. The point 
really at issue in the first of these cases is whether the men 
brought in should be governed by their home scale when 
the latter is the higher ; for it is a practically universal rule 
that no union will allow men to come from one locality to 
another and work for less than the rate maintained in the 

1 Stone Cutters' Journal, April, 1901. 

2 Ibid., December, 1898; February, March, 1899. 

8 Ibid., January, 1900, Supplement ; Constitution, 1900, Art. XXXII ; 
Constitution, 1909, Art. XXX. 

4 Ibid., February, 1901 ; January, August, 1903 ; January, February, 
1904; January, 1906. 

6 Granite Cutters' Journal, April, May, 1896. 

" Ibid., November, 1901. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 179 

latter. Nearly all the unions which have rules on the point 
hold that the higher rate shall govern, whether it be that of 
the locality in which the work is done or that from which the 
men are brought by an employer of their city. 1 The Brick- 
layers present an exception to the above practice. Several 
years ago a number of members of a Pittsburgh local union 
went to Buffalo with a Pittsburgh contractor and accepted 
the Buffalo rate, which was lower than the Pittsburgh rate. 
The matter was brought to the Judiciary Board for a deci- 
sion, and the board decided that the men had a right to do 
that, though they also had a right to refuse to go for less 
than the Pittsburgh rate. 2 

In the second class of cases — those involving the ship- 
ment of materials — there is diversity in present practice. 
The local unions to which the work is shipped feel that the 
work done on the materials ought to be paid for at the 
local rate; otherwise union men are competing with them 
by working at less than their rate of wages. Some of the 
national unions interested, particularly the Carpenters, the 
Woodworkers and the Granite Cutters, insist only on the 
payment of the rate of the locality in which the work is 
done. The first two, however, have national minimum rates 
for the use of their labels and the Granite Cutters have a 
national minimum rate for all work. The Sheet Metal 
Workers, the Marble Workers, and the Boiler Makers 
insist that the scale of the local union in which the work is 
to be set up shall be paid if it is the higher. 3 The Stone 
Cutters after a long struggle with the question have finally 
taken the same position as the Granite Cutters. 

For years the Stone Cutters attempted to maintain the 
rule that stone could not be shipped from one place to 

1 This is the rule among the Carpenters, Painters, Plumbers, Steam 
Fitters, Lathers, Elevator Constructors, Sheet Metal Workers, and 
Slate and Tile Roofers. Of course, workmen as individuals may- 
leave one locality and go to another to work for an employer in 
the latter at the standard rate there prevailing. It is only when 
workmen go in the employ of the home contractor that the rule 
applies. 

2 Proceedings, 1904, pp. 308-9. 

8 Boiler Makers' Constitution, 1908, Art. XVI, sec. 18 . 



180 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

another unless the union wage rate at the shipping point 
was equal to that of the receiving point, except " in cases 
where the interchange of work between the two branches is 
mutually agreeable without regard to wages." 1 This rule 
was not strictly observed, and stone was shipped into the 
jurisdictions of branches from lower rate localities in many 
cases in which it was not agreeable to the former. 2 The 
-question as to the shipment of stone became involved with 
that of the use of the machine planer. The absolute prohi- 
bition of the shipment of planer-cut stone into the jurisdic- 
tion of those local unions which had succeeded in keeping 
out the planer 3 seems to have strengthened the feeling 
against the shipment of stone. In the 1902 convention the 
sentiment was strongly in that direction and shipment was 
forbidden in all cases in which it was not agreeable to the 
unions at the receiving points. 4 Nor did this rule prove 
satisfactory. It did not stop the shipment of stone, and it 
aroused many complaints. It was repealed in 1904 and the 
convention allowed the transportation of hand-cut stone 
where wages and hours were equal. 5 The action of the 1904 
convention did not settle the question, as the shipments con- 
tinued. 6 Some of the shipping local unions with lower rates 
put special rates on work that was to be shipped equal to 
the rates at the points of consignment. The receiving points 
objected that this was an evasion of the constitutional rule 
against "more than one rate of wages." The executive 
board was divided on the point and made no decisive ruling, 7 
and the shipping local unions continued the practice, 8 while 

1 Constitution, 1892. 

2 Stone Cutters' Journal, March, April, 1895 ; November, 1897 ; 
March, 1898; May, June, July, 1899; June, 1902; January, 1904. 

3 Constitution, 1900, Art. XII, sec. 2. 

4 Stone Cutters' Journal, January, 1903, Supplement, pp. 17-21 ; 
Constitution, 1902. 

5 Stone Cutters' Journal, October, 1904, Supplement, pp. 13-19; 
Constitution, 1904, Art. XII. 

8 Stone Cutters' Journal, January, September-November, 1905 ; 
January, February, August, 1906. One of the national officers stated 
in 1908 that three-fourths of the stone set was shipped in already cut. 

7 Stone Cutters' Journal, January, September, 1905. 

8 Ibid., January, February, March, May, June, 1906; June, 1907. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 181 

the receiving points continued their complaints against the 
competition of lower-rate shipping points. 1 In 1906 the 
president and secretary of the national union declared 
against the rule, upholding the contentions of the shipping 
local unions that it was " unfraternal" to object to stone 
cut by union men, and that as the shipping unions could not 
force up their rates the strict enforcement of the rule would 
drive the work from union to non-union men.- 2 The re- 
peated recommendations of the officers proved effective. 
The 1908 convention struck out the article in question and 
left shipment entirely free. 3 

Ill 

Comparison of Piece and Time Rates 

The tendency toward wider than local areas of rate appli- 
cation is not nearly so strong among the time-working as 
among the piece-working unions. This is due in large part 
to the fact that the areas of competition are not so wide for 
the time-working trades as a group as for the piece-working 
trades. Aside from the unions referred to above as main- 
taining sectional or national standard or minimum rates, 
it is generally true of the time-working unions that compe- 
tition is for the most part local. 4 In the numerically largest 
group of time-working trades, the building trades, compe- 
tition, except in cutting stone and preparing wood and metal 
to be put in place on buildings, is not operative to an appre- 
ciable extent as an influence toward wider uniformity in 
rates of wages. In some other unions part of the work 
done under time rates is competitive over much wider than 

1 Stone Cutters' Journal, October, 1905 ; January, 1906. 

2 Ibid., January, February, March, August, 1906; June, September, 
1907; May, June, August, 1908. 

3 Ibid., September, pp. 8-10, December, 1908; Constitution, 1908. 

* Where the product can be easily snipped in competition, it is 
likely to be classified and standardized so that different patterns or 
styles are known to the trade. In such trades piece work is physi- 
cally feasible and piece work with sectional and national scales or 
with a sectional or a national system of equalized lists is likely to 
be acceptable both to the manufacturers and the men. Hence, we 
find that most of the trades which are subject to wider than local 
competition are on a piece work basis. 



1 82 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

local areas, as is the case with the Molders, the Machinists, 
the Bookbinders and the unions in the printing trades. This 
is not, however, the major part, though it is considerable 
enough to arouse some feeling for greater uniformity. 1 
But there are many cases of non-uniform time standard 
rates within areas of experienced competition. There is, 
generally speaking, less adjustment of time-standard rates 
than of piece rates to avoid competition between local 
unions. It is safe to assume that if the competitive work 
done under varying time rates by members of the unions 
just referred to were done under the piece system, and uni- 
form price lists were physically possible, in some of these 
unions the rates would be of wider application than at 
present and in the others there would have been a much 
stronger agitation for uniform rates than there has been. 
The explanation of the wider area of piece than of time 
rates is to be found partly in a difference in the relation 
of the two classes of rates to competition as well as in the 
more local character of the competition in most time-work- 
ing trades. There is an evident difference between the two 
forms of rates in the degree of direct connection with recog- 
nizable labor cost. Non-uniform piece rates where condi- 
tions are similar are standing evidence of differences in 
labor cost for the product or its parts. 2 Where minimum 
time rates differ, proportional differences in labor cost do 
not necessarily follow. The differences in the minimum do 
not necessarily indicate a similar difference in the wages 
actually paid. Moreover, and this is more important, the 
higher rates of wages are often paid in the localities which 
have men of higher than average efficiency. There is a tend- 
ency for the higher-rate cities to attract the better men, at 

1 Machinists' Journal, 1905, p. 710; 1907, p. 42; Iron Molders' 
Journal, April, 1900, p. 212; Proceedings of the Bookbinders, 1896, 
1898, 1900, 1902; The Bookbinder, June, 1904, p. 106; Barnett, pp. 30, 
Z6 f 40, 140. t 

2 Non-uniform shop piece prices in the metal trades arouse little 
comment, because they are as a rule not published and are not for 
pieces standard in the trade as are the pieces in the glass, iron and 
steel, and pottery trades. 



The Area of the Standard Rate 183 

least, within the same general section. A change to a uni- 
form time rate for all localities in the same section would 
not mean the removal of inequalities in actual labor cost to 
nearly the same degree as the establishment of uniform 
piece prices for the same patterns made under the same 
physical conditions. 

The fact that employers do not regard differences in 
time standard rates as indicative of proportional differences 
in labor cost accounts in large measure for the smaller rela- 
tive importance which most time-working unions have 
attached to securing uniform standard time rates for com- 
petitive areas. There is not the same impulse toward uni- 
formity from the high-rated local unions in order to hold 
their own employers to the higher rates which is evident in 
piece-working unions when rates are not uniform, for the 
employers in localities paying the higher rates do not offer 
the same resistance to paying more than employers in other 
places. Time rates in competitive trades are more influ- 
enced, too, by local conditions than are piece rates. Time 
rates stand out plainly in connection with the cost of living 
and in comparison with wages in other trades of more local 
competition. In piece scales, on the other hand, it is the 
price per piece that stands out, not the weekly earnings, and 
in setting the price for each piece the price paid by com- 
peting manufacturers in other places must be given more 
attention by the union than the local cost of living or the 
local wages in other trades. 

There is, to be sure, a widespread feeling in favor of 
uniformity in rates among members of time-working unions. 
It is founded on the desire of most local unions to obtain 
as high rates as any in the trade, and is reenforced by the 
desire of the higher-rated unions when the product is com- 
peting over a widespread area to force the lower-rated 
unions to demand rates as high as their own. But it is the 
second feeling alone which effectively influences the policies 
of national unions, except in the case of the railroad, sea- 
men's and longshoremen's unions. In these unions the 



1 84 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

wider areas over which the service is rendered and for 
which distinct negotiations are conducted are naturally made 
the units of application of the rates agreed upon. Where 
the wage agreements must be local, and particularly where 
competition is largely local, the desire for uniformity does 
not prevail over differences in local conditions. And even 
where competition between localities is keenly felt, the state 
minimum, or at best the national minimum, is apparently 
the most that can be hoped for. 1 

1 The officers of such unions as the Machinists and the Granite 
Cutters state that differences in local minimum rates cannot be 
overcome. The rates will necessarily vary with local conditions, the 
chief of which is cost of living. Some places cannot be brought up 
to the level of the average and the general level of the others must 
be above the average. 



CHAPTER IV 

THE FORM OF THE RATE 

American trade unions fall into several distinct groups 
when classified with respect to their attitude toward the 
system of wage payment. The first and most obvious dis- 
tinction is between those unions which accept the piece sys- 
tem willingly, or even preferably, and those unions which 
prefer the time system, even to the point of opposing piece 
work. The group of unions which accept the piece system 
willingly may be conveniently divided into two groups — 
one composed of predominantly piece-working unions, and 
one of unions in which a majority of the members work 
under the time system. Similarly, those unions which 
oppose piece work may be grouped according to whether a 
majority or a minority of their members are remunerated 
under the piece system. A distinct group may also be made 
of those time-working unions in which the question of 
accepting piece work is not now an issue. There is no im- 
portant time-working union which desires to Change to the 
piece system. 

I 

The Attitude of the Unions 

From this standpoint, therefore, there may be distin- 
guished five groups of unions: (i) unions in which piece 
payment is the prevailing system and which accept piece 
work willingly; (2) unions in which piece work is not the 
prevailing system, but which accept it without opposition in 
those places or branches in which it is desired; (3) time- 
working unions in which the piece question is not an issue ; 
(4) unions in which piece work is the prevailing system and 
in which there is opposition to the piece system; (5) unions 

185 



1 86 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

in which time work is the prevailing system and in which 
piece work is opposed. 1 

An attempt has been made to ascertain the membership of 
the unions included in each of these five groups. This has 
not, of course, been done with exactness. The statistics of 
membership available are only approximations, and the num- 
ber of members working under the piece system in those 
unions in which there is any considerable number of piece 
workers has been but roughly estimated and for a few 
unions not even an estimate has been obtained. Yet the 
statistics here given are offered in the belief that they give a 
substantially correct impression of the proportion of the 
total union membership included in each of the five groups 
indicated above, and of the distribution of piece workers 
among the various groups. 

The aggregate membership of the unions included in the 
following tables was in 1908 about 1,707,400. These include 
all the national unions affiliated with the American Federa- 
tion of Labor except three small unions with a total mem- 
bership of 1700 about whose wage systems no information 
was obtained. These 113 national unions reported to the 
Federation in 1908 an aggregate membership of 1,561,500. 
The following unions not in the Federation are also in- 
cluded, Bricklayers and Masons, Flint Glass Workers, Ma- 
chine Textile Printers, the Marine Engineers, Plasterers, 
Window Glass Workers, Railway Carmen and Railway 

1 The four unions in the railway train service, the Brotherhood of 
Locomotive Firemen, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and 
Enginemen, the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen and the Order 
of Railway Conductors, follow a system of payment which is neither 
a pure time nor a pure piece system, and consequently are not con- 
cerned in the question of preference for one kind of rate over the 
other. The great majority of their members are paid according to 
miles covered, modified by the number of hours worked (see above, 
pp. 72-76). A considerable minority of the members of these unions, 
those engaged in the yard switching service, are paid by the day; 
but the question of preference is not raised since no other system of 
payment seems feasible for this* kind of work. The system of pay- 
ment is not an important issue between these unions and the railroad 
companies, though on some roads the mileage basis has not yet been 
adopted to the extent desired by the unions. These unions include 
272,500 members. 



The Form of the Rate 187 

Clerks. These had a membership in 1908 of 145,900. A 
few small national unions not affiliated with the Federation, 
the Industrial Workers of the World, with a membership 
of 13,200, the Western Federation of Miners, with a mem- 
bership of 30,500 and the Knights of Labor, whose member- 
ship could not be ascertained, are not included. 

1. The group of unions in which piece payment is the 
prevailing system and is accepted willingly, includes twenty- 
four unions with an aggregate membership of 399,500. 
This comprises such important unions as the Cigar Makers, 
the Flint Glass Workers, the Glass Bottle Blowers, the Hat- 
ters, the Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel and Tin 
Workers, the Potters, and the Window Glass Workers. The 
Broom and Whisk Makers, the Chain Makers, the Elastic 
Goring Weavers, the Gold Beaters, the Lace Curtain Opera- 
tives, the Leather Workers, the Mule Spinners, the Pen and 
Pocket Knife Grinders, the Powder and High Explosive 
Workers, the Stove Mounters, the Table Knife Grinders, the 
Tin Plate Workers, and the Wire Weavers also work by 
the piece willingly and have at least two-thirds of their 
members at work under the piece system. The United Mine 
Workers, the largest American union, has at least sixty per 
cent, of its membership on piece work and prefers it for men 
engaged in mining and loading at the face. 1 The Coopers 
also have a large majority of their members on piece work 
and make no objection to the system. 2 In the Boot and 
Shoe Workers' Union and the Textile Workers' Union the 
system of remuneration is left entirely to the local union 
and the national union has no policy with reference thereto ; 
but in both unions three-fourths of the members are piece 
workers and the national officers state that the majority of 
the members prefer payment by piece to payment by time. 

1 Nearly all the workers in this union for whom piece work is 
feasible are piece workers. 

2 In his report to the 1902 convention, the secretary of the national 
union advised the piece workers to strive to " abolish, as far as 
possible, the undesirable piece system" (Proceedings, 1902, p. 345). 
But the present secretary is of the opinion that the system of pay- 
ment " will never be changed." 



1 88 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

It may be estimated that at least 274,000, or two-thirds of 
the total union membership in this group, are actually work- 
ing under the piece system. 

The membership of these unions is approximately as fol- 
lows : 

Boot and Shoe Workers 32,000 

Broom and Whisk Makers 800 

Chain Makers . . 600 

Cigar Makers 40,900 

Coopers 4,900 

Elastic Goring Weavers 100 

Flint Glass Workers 7,000 

Glass Bottle Blowers 8,800 

Gold Beaters 500 

Hatters 8,500 

Iron, Steel and Tin Workers 10,000 

Lace Curtain Operatives 800 

Leather Workers 800 

Mine Workers 252,500 

Mule Spinners 2,200 

Pen and Pocket Knife Blade Grinders and Finishers 300 

Potters ,..i 5,900 

Powder and High Explosive Workers 500 

Stove Mounters 1,400 

Table Knife Grinders 300 

Textile Workers 12,000 

Tin Plate Workers 1,400 

Window Glass Workers 6,100 

Wire Weavers 300 

2. The second group of unions consists of those in which 
piece work is not the prevailing system but in which a con- 
siderable number of local unions or branches of the trade 
accept it without opposition and without discouragement 
from the national union. 1 There are in this group nine 
national unions as enumerated below. The Tobacco Work- 
ers' Union has about half its members working under the 
piece system and the union offers no objection. The Long- 
shoremen and Marine Transport Workers have many 
branches on the Great Lakes under the piece system. For 
men engaged in the loading and unloading of vessels, except 
the lumber loaders, this is the prevailing system. 2 The piece 

1 See also below, p. 199, note. 

2 This union has no national policy as to systems of payment. The 
writer has been unable to secure a close estimate of the part of the 
membership working under the piece system; it is at least one-third 
but less than one-half. 



The Form of the Rate 189 

system also prevails in the stove-molding branch of the 
Holders' Union and has been accepted practically without 
opposition in that division of the trade for the past ten 
years. 1 The Lathers' Union allows wood lathers to work 
under the piece system if they choose and in most of the 
smaller local unions this system is followed. The workers 
in a few branches of the Brick, Tile and Terra Cotta Work- 
ers for whom the piece system is feasible work under it 
without objection. The Typographical Union has nine- 
tenths of its members on the time system; but local unions 
may permit piece work, and an increasing number of local 
unions are adopting piece scales for machine typesetting, a 
branch of the work until recently almost exclusively under 
the time system. 2 The Slate Workers and Tip Printers 
have some piece-working branches, but these apparently 
include but a minority of the membership. The Steel and 
Copper Plate Printers and the Steel Plate Transfers each 
have a considerable part of their members on the piece sys- 
tem without active opposition. The writer has been unable 
to ascertain whether these constitute a majority of the mem- 
beership, and on that account they are included here rather 
than in the list of predominantly piece-working unions. 

The membership of the unions in this second group, ex- 
clusive of the Molders, aggregates 92,900. The total mem- 
bership of the Molders is not included because of the strong 
opposition of that union to piece work in certain branches 
of the molding trade. If the members engaged in stove 
molding be added, the total of the group is 110,900. Prob- 
ably 40,000 of these are piece workers. The membership 
of this group is distributed as follows: 

1 One of the officials of the national union estimates that the num- 
ber of members in this branch varies from 18,000 to 24,000, with 
the state of trade. The total membership of the union was given in 
1908 as 50,000. 

2 Barnett, p. 132. In 1887 the membership by referendum vote 
declared in favor of abolishing piece work in book and job offices. 
In 1891, when the International Union adopted a definite policy 
with reference to typesetting machines, the convention advised the 
local unions to adopt the time system of payment for operators. At 
present a considerable proportion of the membership is strongly 
opposed to piece work. 



190 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

Brick, Tile, and Terra Cotta Workers 2,800 

Longshoremen 31,500 

Slate Workers 2,700 

Steel and Copper Plate Printers 1,200 

Steel Plate Transferrers 100 

Tip Printers 200 

Tobacco Workers 4,600 

Typographical Union 44,000 

Wood, Wire, and Metal Lathers 5,800 

3. By far the largest number of unions fall into the class 
of those which follow the time system exclusively or almost 
exclusively, and in which the question of working under the 
piece system is not an issue with the employers. This group 
includes the following unions, with an aggregate member- 
ship of about 864,600 or fifty-one per cent, of the total union 
membership here under consideration : 

Actors 1,100 

Bakers 10,500 

Barbers 25,500 

Bill Posters 1,400 

Brewery Workmen 40,000 

Bricklayers and Masons 64,600 

Bridge and Structural Iron Workers 10,000 

Carpenters and Joiners (Amalgamated) 8,100 

Carpenters and Joiners (United Brotherhood of) . . 179,600 

Cement Workers 7,300 

Commercial Telegraphers 1,900 

Compressed Air Workers 1,300 

Cutting Die and Cutter Makers 300 

Electrical Workers 32,100 

Elevator Constructors 2,500 

Freight Handlers and Warehousemen 7,800 

Foundry Employees 700 

Granite Cutters 13,000 

Heat, Frost, General Insulators, and Asbestos 

Workers 800 

Hod Carriers and Building Laborers 11,200 

Horseshoers 6,100 

Hotel and Restaurant Employees 38,600 

Lithographers 1,100 

Machine Printers and Color Mixers 500 

Machine Textile Printers 400 

Maintenance of Way Employees 13,500 

Marble Workers 2,2<&> 

Marine Engineers 10,90a 

Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen 6,300 

Musicians 37,500 

Paper Makers 4,300 

Pattern Makers : 5,5oa 

Pavers and Rammermen 1,50a 



The Form of the Rate 191 

Photo Engravers 2,900 

Plasterers 15,200 

Plumbers and Gas Fitters and Helpers 18,000 

Post Office Clerks 1,200 

Printing Pressmen 17,200 

Print Cutters 400 

Quarry Workers 4,500 

Railroad Telegraphers 15,000 

Railway Clerks 9,100 

Retail Clerks 50,000 

Composition Roofers 1,000 

Seamen 25,500 

Sheet Metal Workers 16,100 

Shipwrights, Joiners and Caulkers 1,600 

Slate and Tile Roofers 600 

Stationary Firemen 17,300 

Steam Engineers 16,800 

Steam and Hot Water Pipe Fitters and Helpers . . . 5,600 

Stereotypers and Electrotypers 3,100 

Stone Cutters 8,300 

Street and Electric Railway Employees 32,000 

Switchmen 9,300 

Teamsters 37,70o 

Theatrical Stage Employees 6,200 

Tile Layers and Helpers 1,900 

In a large number of unions in this group, and for the 
greater part of the workmen, piece work does not seem 
practicable. This is evidently the case in such unions as the 
Retail Clerks, the Steam Engineers, the Stationary Fire- 
men, the Musicians, the Seamen, the Street Railway Em- 
ployees, the Commercial Telegraphers, the Railroad Teleg- 
raphers, and the Theatrical Stage Employees. In many 
other unions in this group, as in the building-trades unions 
generally, 1 the Brewery Workmen, the Horseshoers, the Pat- 

1 Practically all the work done on buildings by members of the 
unions in this group is done under the time system. Some shop 
workers of the Sheet Metal Workers and the Electrical Workers 
and a few millmen of the Carpenters work under the piece system, 
and a number of local unions of the Granite Cutters, the Stone 
Cutters, and the Bricklayers and Masons allow piece work on kerb- 
ing, bridges, and other rough work which competent journeymen will 
ordinarily not do when building work can be obtained. A few local 
unions of the Granite Cutters still have some members working in 
yards under the piece system. But in all these unions the piece 
system is in force for so few members or in such relatively unim- 
portant branches of the trade that it is not at this time an issue. 
The Brewery Workmen include in their union some women and 
boys on piece work in the bottling departments, and the Bakers have 
some confectionery workers under the piece system. The Meat 



192 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

tern Makers, and the Teamsters, piece work is not feasible. 

The unions in this group would doubtless oppose with 
vigor any attempt to extend or introduce the piece system. 
In many of these trades the union has been instrumental in 
eliminating piece work, or at least has at some time or other 
declared its opposition thereto. This is especially true in 
the building trades. Several of the building-trades unions 
have opposed the piece system and have succeeded in secur- 
ing its abolition or in preventing its introduction on any 
considerable scale. It is now generally assumed in the 
building trades that any of the unions, except the Lathers, 
would resist attempts to introduce or extend the piece sys- 
tem for work on buildings. 1 

The Stone Cutters and the Carpenters fought for years 
against piece work before it was practically given up in the 
trade. The piece system was common in stone cutting long 
before the present national union was formed, and the union 
made a vigorous fight against piece work in the early nine- 
ties. 2 The employers in most of the places where the piece 
system prevailed were not strongly opposed to giving it up 
and the union was successful in securing its practical elimi- 
nation from the trade. 3 From the formation of their na- 
tional organization the Carpenters also have fought against 
piece work. Indeed the piece system was one of the trade 
evils which the national union was organized to combat. 4 
At an early date in the history of the union the members 
were prohibited from working under the piece system; but 

Cutters have very few members on piece work now, as changes in 
methods of working have eliminated the system ; but at one time 
there was a considerable number of pieceworkers in the union and 
the convention of 1002 adopted a resolution urging the local unions 
to abolish piece work (Proceedings, 1902, p. 81). 

1 Three building-trades unions not included in this group, the 
Painters and Paperhangers, the Wood Carvers, and the Wood 
Workers are entered below in the list of unions with a minority of 
piece workers which oppose the system. 

8 Constitution, 1892, Art. XVII, sec. 1; Stone Cutters' Journal, 
January, February, October, December, 1893 ; May, June, September, 
November, 1894; January, 1895. 

3 Stone Cutters' Journal, October, 1897; March, 1898; October, 
December, 1899. 

4 Constitution, 1886, Art. II. 



The Form of the Rate 193 

it was not until very recently that it ceased to be an issue 
in work on buildings. 1 The union at present does not 
allow its members to work by the piece on any union build- 
ing job. 

The last of the older building-trades unions to oppose 
piece work as a national organization was the Granite Cut- 
ters. When the national union was organized in 1887, the 
majority of its members were working by piece. In New 
England, particularly, where the main strength of the union 
lay in the first years of its history, the day workers were 
few. 2 Even large cities outside the quarrying district, had 
piece bills and in New York the work was for the most part 
under the piece system. 3 The national organization recog- 
nized both systems. 4 The day system gained ground in 
the early eighties, and it became the practice in many places 
to make the "standard" rate for day men the basis for 
fixing piece prices. 5 For the most part the change to the 
time system was without contest, the local unions favoring 
the change but not engaging in struggles to bring it about 
when the employers were seriously opposed. In New York, 
for instance, the change was made in 1881 at the instance of 
the employers, who preferred time rates to the " piece bill " 
then proposed. 6 

The growing sentiment against piece work resulted in an 
agitation which was taken up by many local unions in the 
spring of 1886 for the abolition of piece work by the na- 
tional union. 7 No action was taken at that time; but the 
agitation undoubtedly hastened the passing of the piece 
system. 8 When the national constitution was revised in 
1897 several branches suggested that the national union take 

1 Constitution, 1886, Art. VI, sec. 2, General Laws, p. 29 ; Proceed- 
ings, 1888, p. 20; Proceedings, 1898, p. 24. 

2 Granite Cutters' Journal, July, August, October, 1877; February, 
1878. 

3 Ibid., March, 1878. 

4 Constitution, 1877, Art. X ; Constitution, 1880, Art. XIII. 
8 Granite Cutters' Journal, October, 1882; April, 1886. 
"Ibid., July, 1882; see also, Ibid., June, 1881 ; February, 1897. 

7 Ibid., March, April, September, 1886. 

8 Ibid., January, September, 1887; April, June, September, 1891. 

13 



194 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

action looking to the abolition of the piece system where it 
still lingered, 1 and a provision against piece work was in- 
serted in the new constitution. 2 The union is now opposed 
to the piece system of remuneration except for aged and 
maimed members. The few piece bills which remain are 
chiefly for such members. Many branches forbid piece 
work altogether except on kerbing. 

Much of the so-called "piece work" which has aroused 
opposition from unions in the building trades is not piece 
work under a regular price list, but consists in an individual 
workman bargaining to do a specific lot of work for a lump 
sum. An individual workman, or several workmen together, 
might agree, for instance, to lay the floors or hang the doors 
on a building for a given sum. This is generally known as 
" lumping " or " sub-contracting," 3 but it is also often called 
" piece work." Most of the building trades unions are op- 
posed to " sub-contracting " and practically refuse to allow 
members to work under such a system. Lumping or sub- 
contracting of this kind differs from ordinary piece work, 
from the union standpoint, in that the union has no partici- 
pation in fixing the price of the work. This system of pay- 
ment was forbidden very early by some of the building- 
trades unions ; in a few even while ordinary piece work was 
still permitted. The Granite Cutters' Union forbade sub- 
contracting in its first constitution. 4 Local unions of the 

1 Granite Cutters' Journal, January, February, 1897. 

2 Constitution, 1897, sec. 2. 

3 The term "sub-contracting" is also used where a sub-contractor 
hires workers to do the work or to assist in doing it, at hourly rates. 
This system is also opposed by the unions, which prefer direct em- 
ployment by the original employer at hourly, or even at piece rates. 
Some of the building trades unions not only forbid their members 
taking such contracts but also prohibit their working for one who is 
sub-contracting. The general executive board of the Carpenters 
decided in 1887 that union members were not to work for a sub- 
contractor, even one who employed only union men and paid them at 
the union rate of wages (Constitution, 1888; Constitution, 1889, 
Standing Decisions, July 30, 1887; Proceedings, 1898, p. 61). The 
Plumbers also forbid sub-contracting of this kind; members are not 
allowed to sub-contract "nor work for any person who has taken 
such a contract" (Constitution, 1904, sec. 194). 

4 Constitution, 1877, Art. XXI; Constitution, 1880, Art. XLI. 



The Form of the Rate 195 

Stone Cutters prohibited it long before opposition to ordi- 
nary piece work appeared. 1 The Carpenters prohibited sub- 
contracting early in their history but did not distinguish it 
from other piece work. -2 

The unions which are opposed to piece work vary con- 
siderably in the extent to which their members work by the 
piece. They also vary greatly in their strength and in the 
intensity with which they are righting or have fought the 
piece system. In some unions, ninety per cent, of the 
members are piece workers; in others, less than ten per 
cent. In some, the hostility shown toward piece work is 
hardly more than an expression of union opinion ; in others 
the opposition is as yet limited to the declaration of a policy 
favored by the majority but which the union is not strong 
enough to press energetically. In only a few of these unions 
has opposition to piece work been carried to the point of 
rigid prohibition of its extension and to an aggressive policy 
of strikes for its abolition. 

Among the unions in which a majority of the member- 
ship work by the piece and in which there is opposition to 
the piece system, no union is at present making a vigor- 
ous fight against the piece system. The noteworthy strug- 
gles which have been made in recent years for its elimi- 
nation or in resistance to its attempted extension, have been 
made by a few unions in which a comparatively small minor- 
ity of the members work by the piece. Most of the pre- 
dominantly piece-working unions which do not accept piece 
work willingly feel that they are not yet in a position to 

1 List of Prices for Piece Work of the Journeyman Stone Cutters' 
Association of Philadelphia, adopted May 12, 1851; Constitution of 
the Journeyman Stone Cutters' Association of the District of Colum- 
bia, 1854; Constitution, 1907, Art. XV. 

2 " Piece work _ is denned to be : work done under sub-contract 
where the work is not done by the day, or where a sub-contract is ! 
taken from a builder or contractor and where the building material 
is furnished by the builder or contractor, and the work is simply 
done for a certain price" (Constitution, 1886, General Laws). The 
Bricklayers seem to have allowed " lumping " in the earliest years J 
of their organization (MS. Proceedings, 1869). 



196 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

push their opposition much farther than a declaration in 
favor of its abolition whenever that may be practicable. A 
union with over half its members actually working under 
the piece system cannot ordinarily offer a very effective 
opposition, except at the risk of a costly strike. Under 
such circumstances the national union usually confines itself 
to Urging the local unions to prevent the extension of piece 
work where they can and to insist on its abolition wherever 
they are strong enough to do so with some likelihood of 
success. 

4. The group of predominantly piece-working unions 
which are opposed to the piece system includes eight unions, 
as below, with an aggregate membership of 65,900, approxi- 
mately fourteen per cent, of the aggregate membership of 
all the predominantly piece-working unions. 

Cloth Hat and Cap Makers 1,300 

Fur Workers 400 

United Garment Workers 43,900 

Glove Workers 800 

Leather Workers on Horse Goods 4,000 

Metal Polishers, Buffers and Platers 10,000 

Piano and Organ Workers 5,000 

Travellers' Goods and Leather Novelty Workers .... 500 

The Leather Workers on Horse Goods, with over three- 
fourths of their members on piece work, are clearly opposed 
to piece payment. Many of the members favor a concerted 
movement for its abolition, but for the time being this 
movement seems to have yielded precedence to an agitation 
tfor the reduction of the normal working day. 1 The Trav- 
ellers' Goods and Leather Novelty Workers went on record 
in 1903 against the piece system, but have not been able to 
reduce it greatly; 2 three-fourths of the members are still 
working under the piece system. The Fur Workers have 
also recently declared against piece work, but have not yet 
begun a vigorous campaign against it. 3 The officers of the 

1 Leather Workers' Journal, May, June, July, 1907. 

2 Proceedings 1903, pp. 12, 15, 23, 35, 38; Official Journal, Septem- 
ber, 1904. 

"Furriers' Journal, April, 1907; April, 1908. 



The Form of the Rate 197 

Cloth Hat and Cap Workers, the Glove Workers, the Metal 
Polishers, and the Piano and Organ Workers state that the 
majority of their members object to piece work, though it 
is the prevailing system in their trades. 

The United Garment Workers are nominally opposed to 
piece work, but are not now actively fighting it, and in three 
branches of the trade it is accepted by the members without 
attempt, and probably without desire, to change to the time 
system. The shirt and overall, the pants-making and the 
vest-making branches have worked under the piece system 
for years and there is little hostility to it apparent in these 
branches. In the other branches the opposition seems to 
have lessened somewhat in the past few years. The most 
vigorous attack on piece work came from the coat-tailoring 
branch and from the cutters. Supported by the national 
officers, the opponents of piece work carried resolutions 
against it through the national convention, 1 and succeeded 
in having embodied in the national constitution a declaration 
in favor of week work as a substitute for piece work. 2 The 
1901 convention instructed the coat tailors' local unions to 
attempt to abolish the piece system and to enforce the week 
system throughout the United States at the earliest possible 
date. 3 The coat tailors thereafter did succeed in establishing 
the time system much more widely. Recently, however, the 
struggle against the piece system, even in the coat-tailoring 
branches, has been relaxed and piece work seems to be 
growing at the expense of day work, 4 though occasionally a 
local union strikes for and obtains the abolition of piece 
work. 5 The secretary of the national union states that " the 
membership works piece or week work as is the custom in 
the trade or as their strength will permit." He estimates 
that one-half the coat tailors are now on the piece system 

Garment Worker, December, 1895; January, 1896; August, 1898; 
Proceedings, 1899; Report of the General Secretary, 1900. 

2 Constitution, 1898, Art. XX, sec. 1 ; Constitution, 1906, Art. XX. 

8 Garment Worker, November. 1901. 

4 Proceedings, 1904; Weekly Bulletin, April 8, 1904; Proceedings, 
1908, p. 73- 

6 Weekly Bulletin, September 13 and 20, 1907. 



198 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

and that of the members of the national union three-fourths 
are piece workers. Of the 65,900 members in the unions 
of this group about 50,000, according to estimates of their 
officials, are piece workers. 

There are also a few predominantly piece-working unions 
in which there has been as yet no active opposition to piece 
work, but in which the officers favor a change to the day 
system and urge it as the proper policy for their unions to 
adopt. Since it is probable that these unions will assume 
a hostile attitude toward piece work if they become strong 
enough to offer effective opposition, they are grouped sepa- 
rately here rather than with the unions which accept piece 
work willingly. They are the Brush Makers with 400 mem- 
bers, the Ladies' Garment Workers with 1,600, the Paving 
Cutters with 2,000, and the Tailors with 16,100. These 
unions with the eight just considered include eighteen per 
cent, of the membership of all the predominantly piece- 
working unions. 

In his report to the convention in 1905, the general secre- 
tary of the Tailors advised that the union should vigor- 
ously favor a change to the weekly system of payment. 1 
Four-fifths of the members of this union are at present 
piece-workers. The president of the Ladies' Garment 
Workers has also expressed the belief that the members 
should try to secure a change to the time system, 2 but the 
majority of the members do not seem anxious to give up 
piece work. The national officers of the Paving Cutters 
and of the Brush Makers also express regret that the piece 
system cannot be done away with in their trades, but in 
neither of these unions is the membership ready to begin a 

1 Proceedings, 1905, in The Tailor, February, 1905. 

2 Proceedings, 1903, p. 9; Proceedings, 1906, p. 11; Proceedings, 
1907, p. 10. With the exception of the cutters, nearly all the mem- 
bers are now on piece work. The cutters are usually time workers 
in the garment and cloth hat and cap trades. The employers prefer 
the time system for cutters since the cutters might not utilize the 
material to the best advantage if a premium were put upon the 
quantity of output by piece payment. 



The Form of the Rate 199 

campaign against it. 1 In both of these unions nine-tenths 
of the members are piece-workers. It is safe to assume 
that at least 17,000 of the 20,100 workers in this group are 
now employed under the piece system. 

5. Eighteen unions are included in the group of predomi- 
nantly time-working unions which favor the total elimina- 
tion of piece work. Their aggregate membership is 246,- 
400, or approximately fourteen per cent, of the total mem- 
bership of the unions here considered : 

Blacksmiths 10,000 

Boiler Makers 15,200 

Bookbinders 7,ooo 

Carriage and Wagon Workers 1,500 

Car Workers 4,400 

Glass Workers, Amalgamated 1,200 

Jewelry Workers 400 

Machinists 62,100 

Molders (exclusive of 18,000 stove molders) 32,000 

Painters, Decorators, and Paperhangers 64,800 

Railway Carmen 32,600 

Saw Smiths 300 

Shingle Weavers 1,700 

Shirt Waist and Laundry Workers 4,000 

Upholsterers 2,800 

Watch Case Engravers 200 

Wood Carvers 1,300 

Wood Workers 4,000 

A number of these unions though heartily favoring the 
total abolition of piece work in their trades, are not making 
the change to the time system a vital issue. They do not 
give it the importance that is given, for example, to the 
establishment of a shorter work day or the closed shop. 
These unions look upon the complete abolition of piece 
work as highly desirable ; but they are not pressing strongly 
for its abolition where it has been long established, though 
they offer what resistance they can to its extension. In 
most of these unions piece work is desired by only a small 
part of the employers or in minor branches of work. 

1 The national officers of some of the unions which do not object 
to piece work hold the opinion that the time system is preferable 
to the piece system, but they do not advise their unions to declare 
against the piece system or suggest that it would be wise to change. 
Whatever may be their personal opinions they accept the piece 
system officially without objection. 



200 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

The Bookbinders, upon the recommendation of their 
president, adopted at their convention in 1896 a resolution 
urging the local unions to abolish piece work but left each 
local union free to work under either system. 1 Little has 
been done toward lessening piece work in recent years. 2 
The constitution recognizes both systems, and about one- 
fourth of the members are still working under the piece 
system. 3 The Wood Workers 4 and the Wood Carvers 5 both 
have rules against members accepting piece work in any 
shop in which it is not already established. The Amalga- 
mated Glass Workers, the union of decorative glass work- 
ers and bevellers, with about one-fourth of the membership 
on piece work, has a similar rule; 6 but so far no local 
union has attempted to abolish piece work. The Shingle 
Weavers, organized but a few years ago, have been in favor 
of the total abolition of piece work from the beginning. 7 
The Saw Smiths and the Carriage and Wagon Workers, 
their officers state, are opposed to the extension of piece 
work in their trades and hope eventually to secure its com- 
plete abolition. The Watch Case Engravers 8 and the Jew- 
elry Workers 9 also favor its entire elimination. 

The Brotherhood of Railway Carmen in 1907 adopted 
resolutions opposing "the introduction of piece work at 

1 Proceedings, 1896. 

2 In four following conventions the president of the union brought 
up the matter of piece work and urged the union to discourage and 
the local unions to abolish it (Proceedings, 1898; Proceedings, 1900; 
Proceedings, 10.02; Proceedings, 1904, in the International Book- 
binder, June, 1904, p. 106). In the report of the executive council 
for July, 1901, and in its report to the 1902 convention the president's 
recommendations were seconded. The piece-work question was not 
treated by the president in his reports to the 1907 and 1908 conven- 
tions, nor did it occupy any considerable place in the convention's 
deliberations (International Bookbinder, June, 1906; June, 1908). 

8 Constitution, 1907, Art. XVIII. Piece work is Confined almost 
entirely to large establishments, and to pamphlets and cloth or 
cheap leather bindings. It affects chiefly the women workers. 

4 Constitution, 1905, sec. 168; Proceedings, 1909, p. 76. 

6 Constitution, 1906, Art. XI, sec. 9, Standing Resolutions, sec. 2. 

6 Constitution, 1905, sec. 154. 

7 Proceedings, 1907, p. 38 ; Proceedings, 1908, p. 25; President's 
Report to the 1908 Convention. 

8 Constitution, 1906, Preamble. 

8 Constitution, 1903, Arts. II, XV. 



The Form of the Rate 201 

any point on any system where it is not in vogue." This 
action was taken despite the fact that the president of the 
union had expressed his regret that members were making 
piece work a subject of contention with their employers and 
had recommended that the organization allow piece pay- 
ment to continue and bend its energies to securing better 
prices. 1 A strike of several weeks' duration against the in- 
troduction of piece work on an important railway system 
of the Southwest occurred the next year but under the set- 
tlement the company was allowed to introduce piece work 
at its option. 2 The other organization of car workers, the 
International Association of Car Workers, is also opposed 
to the extension of piece work. 3 The Brotherhood of Paint- 
ers, Decorators and Paperhangers has long been opposed 
to piece work in other branches than paper hanging. The 
union favors day work for the paper hangers, but proposes 
the "gradual natural extinction" of piece work. 4 The 
Upholsterers also have recently made the abolition of piece 
work one of their policies. 5 The opposition in the Shirt, 
Waist and Laundry Workers is also recent, but the presi- 
dent has strongly urged his union to abolish piece work. 6 

The four important unions in the metal trades, in which 
time work predominates, the Blacksmiths, the Boiler Makers, 
the Machinists, and the Molders (except the stove-molding 
branch), have been long opposed to the piece system and 
have, as a group, made the most persistent and effective fight 
against it in recent years. For a large part of the work in 
these trades the piece system is not desired by the employers. 

1 Proceedings, 1907, pp. 17, 54, 68, 69. 

2 Railway Carmen's Journal, 1908, pp. 300, 405, 514. 

3 Proceedings, 1907, pp. 17, 18, 20. 

4 Official Journal, February, 1908, p. 86. Many members work at 
both paper hanging and painting, and the secretary of the national 
union is unable to estimate exactly the number of members affected 
by the piece-work issue. It is probably not more than a third of the 
membership. 

^Constitution, 1908, sec. 4. The writer was unable to secure an 
estimate of the part of the membership on piece work, but it is 
apparently well under one-half. 

6 Report of the General President, September, 1907, to September, 
1908. 



202 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

In machinery and jobbing, general contract, and repair shops 
the work is usually not of such a character that the piece 
system is feasible. But in " specialty " or in railroad or loco- 
motive shops, where there is frequent recurrence of pieces 
of the same kind, many employers have at times preferred 
to have their men work under the piece system. The 
unions are more strongly opposed to piece work in the gen- 
eral contract shops than to the more regular piece work of 
the large specialty, railroad, and locomotive shops, and have 
succeeded in almost eliminating it in the former. 

The Blacksmiths' Union is not as strong as the Boiler 
Makers, Machinists or Molders, though it has gained ground 
rapidly in the last ten years. It has long been opposed to 
piece work and with increasing strength it has fought more 
and more vigorously against the extension of the piece sys- 
tem. 1 Several times it has joined the Machinists and the 
Boiler Makers in important strikes to prevent its introduc- 
tion in railroad shops. 2 It has also secured the abolition of 
piece work in many shops. The president of the union esti- 
mates that not more than ten per cent, of the members 
are now working under the piece system. The present 
policy of the union is not to make an active fight against 
piece work where the system has long been established, but 
to secure its abolition where this is possible without serious 
strikes. 

The Molders' Union has been concerned with the piece- 
work problem for over half a century. In the stove branch, 
in which the national union at its foundation was strongest, 
the piece system had been almost exclusively followed from 
the beginning. 3 When foundries began to specialize in other 
branches of molding, as, for instance, on agricultural ma- 
chinery, piece work was widely introduced in these specialty 

1 Constitution, 1897, Art. XI, sec. 4, of Constitution of Local 
Unions. 

a For instance, Blacksmiths' Journal, June, 1903, p. 2; May, 1908, 
p. 24. 

3 International Journal, October, 1866, p. 222; January, 1874, p. 
229; Iron Molders' Journal, December, 1885, p. 5; March, 1894, P. 3- 



The Form of the Rate 203 

shops. 1 In general jobbing and machinery foundries, on the 
other hand, the time system has always been the predominant 
■one, 2 but even in this branch a number of manufacturers 
have from time to time desired some of their molders to 
work under the piece system. From the first the union has 
been opposed to piece work, but the opposition was not 
■equally strong in all branches, and a policy of acceptance 
and regulation was often recommended by the officers. In 
recent years there has been a growing divergence in the 
policies pursued for the different branches of the trade, 
and in the stove-molding branch piece work is now prac- 
tically unopposed. 

Opposition to the piece system was very early manifested 
in the conventions of the national union. The second con- 
vention, that of i860, recommended to the local unions the 
abolition of piece work, 3 and this policy was consistently 
urged by the conventions for several years thereafter, 4 but 
no active steps were taken in that direction by the national 
union. The strength of the union in its earliest years lay 
largely in the stove and hollow-ware branches of the trade, 5 
and both of these were piece-working branches. The sev- 
enth annual convention, that of 1866, adopted a rule, which 
was not to be effective until ratified by a three-fourths vote 
of the membership, that after January 1, 1867, piece work 
-should not be accepted by union members. The president 
of the national union opposed the adoption of the rule, as 
he did not believe the time had arrived for such a radical 
stand against piece work. 6 Only twenty local unions voted 

1 Iron Molders' Journal, July, 1876; December, 1885; January, 
1888; March, 1894. 
2 International Journal, January, 1874, p. 229. 
8 Ibid., February, 1874, p. 258. 

4 Ibid., April, 1874, p. 322; May, 1874, p. 354. 

5 Frey and Commons, loc. cit. 

8 William H. Sylvis was then president of the union. The views 
which he expressed at that time as to the proper policy for the 
union to pursue with reference to piece work deserve quotation. 
He said, " Although I am opposed to piece work and fully acknowl- 
edge its evil effects upon the trade, and, although I as much desire 
its abolition as any man, yet I am free to admit the dangers, which 
in my opinion surround any legislation upon it, beyond an endeavor 



204 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

on the question and these were nearly evenly divided. 1 The 
view expressed by the president of the union in 1866 was 
for years that generally held by the officers. 2 In the union 
at large, however, the feeling against the system and in 
favor of its abolition continued strong, and under this influ- 
ence the convention from time to time condemned the piece 
system with vigor, but did not for years again recommend 
an outright struggle with piece-work as an issue. 3 

In the convention of 1886 the committee on piece work 
recommended the adoption of a rule requiring the abolition 
of piece work in all shops under union jurisdiction by May 
1, 1887. The convention endorsed the recommendation, 
but left the decision as to the date on which the prohibition 
should become effective to the national officers, and also 
provided that the prohibition should first be ratified by a 
vote of the membership. 4 The officers did not see fit to 
inaugurate such a movement, and though the opposition to 
piece work continued strong the convention refrained for a 
long period from recommending specific action. 5 After 
1895 tne opposition to piece work stiffened. With increas- 
ing strength the union began a series of persistent local 
fights against the system in all branches except stove mold- 
ing and particularly in the general jobbing and machinery 
foundries. In this last branch the movement for the aboli- 
tion of piece work met with considerable success. 6 This 

to correct some of the abuses to which the system is subject. I 
give it as my deliberate opinion, reached after long and careful 
consideration, that piece work will never be abolished, and that, 
should this convention adopt a resolution fixing a time when it 
should cease, and undertake to enforce it, the result would be a 
dismemberment of the organization, and, perhaps, its total destruc- 
tion" (International Journal, January, 1867, p. 309). 

1 International Journal, July, 1866, p. 121 ; January, 1867. 

2 Iron Molders' Journal, 1874, pp. 307, 354; July, 1876; January, 
1877. 

3 International Journal, March, April, July, 1873 ; March, May, De- 
cember, 1874; Iron Molders' Journal, December, 1876; July, 1877; 
January, June, 1878; April, 1880; April, 1882; September, October, 
December, 1885; February, 1886. 

4 Proceedings, 1886, p. 32. 

5 Iron Molders' Journal, March, May, September, 1887; January, 
1888; December, 1892; March, 1894; Proceedings, 1889, p. 59. 

8 Proceedings, 1895, p. 75; Iron Molders' Journal, June, 1896; 
February, 1897; December, 1899; Proceedings, 1899, pp. 21-30. 



The Form of the Rate 205 

strengthened the feeling for a general abolition of piece 
work, and before the convention met in 1899 an agitation 
had begun for the adoption of a rule requiring its abolition 
by a given date. 1 

The sentiment in the convention in favor of the abolition 
of all piece work was strong.- President Fox, though de- 
claring that he favored the ultimate extinction of piece 
work, urged the convention not to attempt to abolish it 
abruptly, particularly in the stove-molding branch. Such 
action, he warned, would cause dissatisfaction among the 
members in that branch and bring on a conflict with the 
Stove Founders' National Defense Association. 3 The con- 
vention ordered a referendum vote on the question of abol- 
ishing piece work generally. If the vote was favorable the 
officers were to promote opposition to piece work among 
the members and to try to secure its abolition at every con- 
ference with the employers. This applied, of course, to the 
stove branch as well as the others. The vote of the mem- 
bership was heavily in favor of abolition.* 

The Holders' representatives at the next conference with 
the Stove Founders' National Defense Association, in the 
spring of 1900, requested the representatives of the Found- 
ers to urge the abolition upon their members. To this the 
employers' representatives declined to agree, though they 
were willing that the union representatives should appear 
before the convention of the Defense Association and advo- 
cate the change. 5 Since that time no official action from 
the side of the union looking toward the abolition of piece 
work in the stove branch has been taken. Under the con- 
ference agreement it could be brought about only with the 
consent of the employers and they are unwilling to consider 
a proposal to change. The stove molders on the whole, as 
well as the union officers, are satisfied with the present sys- 

1 Iron Molders' Journal, May, 1899, p. 235. 

2 Proceedings, 1899, pp. 67, 73, 91. 
8 Ibid., p. 12. 

4 Iron Molders' Journal, March, 1900, p. 151. 
'Ibid., April, 1900, pp. 183, 206-7. 



206 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

tern and with the safeguards provided by the conference 
agreement. 

In the machinery and jobbing branch, the officers and the 
local unions continued the fight vigorously. 1 In the con- 
ferences between the union and the National Founders' 
Association the representatives of the latter were anxious 
to secure an agreement that piece work should be allowed 
in this branch at the option of the employer, but the union 
refused to agree. 2 An official of the national union esti- 
mates that not more than ten per cent, of the members in 
foundries of this class are now working under the piece 
system. The national union will oppose its extension, but 
where the system is established its abolition is left to the 
local unions. In agricultural shops, plumbers' supply shops, 
railroad shops, and other specialty shops, the union does 
not fight piece work vigorously. The organization is not 
on the whole as strong in these shops as in the general ma- 
chinery and jobbing foundries, and in those shops in which 
it is strong the conditions are more favorable for piece work 
than in shops of the latter branch. 

From its organization the International Association of 
Machinists has maintained an attitude of hostility towards 
piece work. The union prohibits the introduction of the 
system, has fought against it in many places, at one time 
ordered in convention that members must strike for its 
abolition before a given date, and yet has not succeeded in 
eliminating it. The preference of some employers for piece 
payment on certain kinds of work makes it impossible to 
force its abolition in their shops without severer struggles 
than the union is willing to undertake. For the past dozen 
years the officers of the national union have suggested that 
the union should accept the piece system where it is gener- 
ally in vogue and should direct effort to improving the oper- 

1 Iron Molders' Journal, April, July, August, 1901 ; August, De- 
cember, 1902; March, 1903; 1904, pp. 170, 504; Proceedings, 1907, 
PP- 9» 156, 161 ; Constitution, 1907, Resolutions, no. 28. 

2 Iron Molders' Journal, July, 1900, p. 383; March, 1901, p. 131; 
MS. Minutes of Conferences, October, 1902, April, 1904. 



The Form of the Rate 207 

ation of the system and to securing the best possible prices 
under it for the workers. This policy has not, however, 
commended itself to the conventions. 

Members were early forbidden by the constitution, under 
penalty of expulsion, to work by the piece except where the 
piece system was already in operation. 1 This rule was not 
found satisfactory by the officers of the national union. In 
1895 the president suggested to the convention that the piece 
system should be recognized and controlled by the union 
inasmuch as it had become established very widely in the 
trade. He pointed out that it was inconsistent to forbid 
members to work by the piece in some shops and to allow 
piece payment in nearby shops in which it had been estab- 
lished before the rule against its introduction was adopted. 
But the convention adhered to the rule although it was not 
prepared to inaugurate a concerted movement to force the 
abolition of the piece system. 2 

In 1 90 1 the president of the national union reported to 
the convention that three-fifths of all difficulties with em- 
ployers in the preceding two years had been over the ques- 
tion of piece work. In that time, he stated, the union had 
prevented its introduction in 114 shops, affecting 2,800 
machinists, whereas in the same time it had been intro- 
duced in 49 shops, affecting 3,653 men. He pointed out 
that one great difficulty was that the men were desirous of 
working under the system of piece payment and many re- 
mained out of the union because of its attitude toward piece 
work. He recommended that the piece system be accepted 
in union shops and that it be controlled; he further main- 
tained that the only logical alternative was to forbid piece 
work to all union members. The two plans were submitted 
to the convention for choice. The president argued that a 
general prohibition could not be enforced and the conven- 

1 Constitution, 1891, Constitution of Subordinate Lodges, Art. XX, 
sec. 2; Machinists' Journal, January, 1893, p. 356. 

2 Proceedings, 1895. There were occasional strikes for the aboli- 
tion of piece work or to prevent its introduction in the next few 
years. See for instance, Machinists' Journal, March, 1896, pp. 46, 
71 ; February, 1900, pp. 101, 104. 



208 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

tion rejected the plan of regulation, leaving the rule stand- 
ing as before. 1 

Before the next convention there were several strikes 
against the attempted introduction of piece work, one of 
these, on a large Western railway system, lasting for eleven 
months. The officers in 1903 again urged the convention 
either to adopt a policy of recognition and control or to 
enforce the prohibition of piece work everywhere, but fa- 
vored the former course. After much discussion, the con- 
vention voted that piece work should be discontinued by 
July 1, 1904. 2 In 1904 the membership voted by a large 
majority not to enforce this rule on account of the depres- 
sion in the trade. 3 Throughout the year 1904 the union 
was on the defensive in the matter of piece work, and many 
local unions were forced to fight against its introduction. 4 

The 1905 convention continued the prohibition of the in- 
troduction of piece work, but rejected the recommendation 
of its committee on piece work that a piece-work fund be 
raised and placed at the disposal of the national officers to 
be used to fight piece work and kindred systems. 5 There 
were many strikes against piece work in 1906 and 1907. 
One of these, on an Eastern railroad system, involved 1,000 
men. 6 The 1907 convention adopted a resolution urging all 
local unions to fight piece work vigorously until its aboli- 
tion was accomplished, but did not recommend a general 
strike with this aim. 7 In his report in September, 1908, the 

1 Machinists' Journal, July, 1901, pp. 465, 652. 

2 Ibid., April, p. 225, June, p. 479, 1903; Proceedings, 1903, in 
Machinists' Journal, July, 1903, p. 619. 

3 Ibid., September, 1904, p. 791. 

4 Ibid., 1904, passim; March, 1905. 

6 The president had declared in his report to the convention that 
piece work was increasing and could not be checked without a 
special fund. (Proceedings, 1905, p. 78; Report of President, in 
Machinists' Journal, October, 1905). 

6 Machinists' Journal, 1906, pp. 427, 428, 723, 729; 1907, pp. 262, 
479, 488. The president of the union stated in the 1907 convention 
that for two years before this strike was called, the lodges on this 
system had had the standing approval of the general executive 
board for a strike against piece work at any time three-fourths of 
the members on the system would vote for such a strike (Pro- 
ceedings, 1907, pp. 48, 49). 

7 Proceedings, 1907, p. 68. 



The Form of the Rate 209 

president of the union again declared that the preference of 
many of the men for piece work made its abolition difficult 
for the union. The result of the union's war on piece work, 
he said, had been to prevent the extension of the system, 
which would have been rapid if the union had not fought it 
with energy ; but the union had not succeeded in decreasing 
the number of plants operated under the piece system or 
the number of men working by the piece. 1 At the present 
time, the officers of the national union strongly prefer the 
time to the piece system of payment, but maintain that it 
would be good policy in plants that cannot be unionized 
except with recognition of the piece-work system for the 
union to accept piece work and to make the best of it. 2 

The Boiler Makers and Iron Ship Builders' Union fought 
successfully for years for the abolition of piece work in the 
boiler-making branch of the trade, and finally secured its 
elimination in the boiler-making shops, including railroad 
shops. 3 In the ship-building branch piece work had always 
been permitted, except on repair work. But in the 1908 
convention the president of the national union declared that 
piece work was wrong in principle and should not be allowed 
in any branch. The convention approved of this recom- 
mendation and voted that piece work should be abolished 
in the ship-building branch as soon as possible. The execu- 
tive board was instructed to investigate each case in which 
work is done by the piece and to set a date for its abolition. 4 

1 Machinists' Journal, September, 1908, p. 789. 

2 An official of the national union stated to the writer that not 
more than six per cent, of the members are now on piece work, 
although twenty-five per cent, of the men in the trade work by the 
piece. Piece payment has been almost entirely eliminated in the 
railroad shops of the South and West, but is not uncommon on the 
roads of the North and East. 

3 Constitution, 1903, Art. XIII, sec. 16. President's Report, 1001, 
in Boiler Makers' Journal, August, 1901 ; August, 1902, p. 289; 
July, 1908, pp. 427, 464. 

4 Boiler Makers' Journal, July, 1908, pp. 427, 478, 507-508; Con- 
stitution, 1908, Art. XIV, sec. 13. An officer of the national union 
estimates that but two per cent, of the members are working under 
the piece system. These are employed in the ship yards. The 
union has a comparatively small part of its members in ship yards 

14 



210 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

Members who encourage the introduction of piece work are 
liable to expulsion. 

Two per cent, of the Boiler Makers, six per cent, of the 
Machinists, ten per cent, of the Blacksmiths, and probably 
not more than one-third of the Painters and Paperhangers 
and one-fourth of the members of the other unions in this 
group work under the piece system. This gives about 49,000 
or twenty per cent, of the total number of unionists in this 
group, under the piece system. 

The following table shows the number of unions, the 
a g§" r egate membership, and the estimated number of piece 
workers in each of the five groups of unions: 





Number of 


Number of 


Number of 




Unions 


Members 


Piece Workers 


Group I 


24 


399,500 


274,000 


Group II 


9 


IIO,000 


4O,O0O 


Group III 


58 


864,600 




Group IV 


I 8 
I 4 


65,900 
20,I00 


50,000 
17,000 


Group V 


18 


246,400 


49,000 


Total 


121 


1,707,400 


430,000 



Summing up the foregoing details, it appears that in 
ninety-one of the one hundred and twenty-one unions the 
question of whether remuneration shall be under the piece 
or the time system is not an issue. These ninety-one unions 
include approximately 1,375,000 members, or about eighty 
per cent, of the total membership. Thirty-three of these, 
with a membership of 51 0,000/ are unions which accept the 
piece system without objection, and of these thirty-three, 
twenty- four are predominantly piece-working unions. These 
have an aggregate membership of 399,500, or approximately 
twenty- three per cent, of the total membership of the one 
hundred and twenty-one unions. 

The group of predominantly piece-working unions which 

at present, but it has had as many as twenty-five per cent, of its 
members in this branch of the trade. 

1 This total includes the stove molders in the Molders' Union. 
That union, with the remainder of its membership, is entered in the 
group of predominantly time-working unions who are opposed to 
piece work. 



The Form of the Rate 211 

are opposed to the piece system includes eight unions, with 
an aggregate membership of 65,900, approximately fourteen 
per cent, of the aggregate membership of all the predomi- 
nantly piece-working unions. As has already been noted, 
the estimated number of piece workers in predominantly 
piece-working unions opposed to the system, exclusive of 
the four unions whose officers are opposed, is approximately 
50,000. If the latter be included in the total of those op- 
posed to piece work, it may be estimated that fifty-eight per 
cent, of the piece-workers opposed to the system are in pre- 
dominantly piece-working unions. Including the four unions 
mentioned above, 116,000 unionists or about seven per cent* 
of the total number of unionists are piece workers in unions 
which oppose the piece system. Without the four unions 
the piece workers in unions opposed are slightly under six 
per cent, of the total union membership, or twenty-three 
per cent, of the total number of piece workers. If the 
larger figure be taken, there are left in unions which are 
not opposed to piece work seventy-three per cent, of those 
working under the piece system. The number of piece 
workers in all the unions is approximately one-fourth of the 
total number. 

From the standpoint of the number of members the unions 
in opposition to piece work loom up more strongly than in 
the number of piece workers included in each. The total 
membership of the unions entered as opposed to piece work 
is 332,400, as contrasted with 510,400 in those unions which 
accept it willingly. The first figure includes, of course,. 
197,000 time workers in predominantly time-working un- 
ions. For a large proportion of these, piece work is not 
feasible and is not a practical issue. The total for unions, 
not opposed also includes 70,000 time workers in predomi- 
nantly time-working unions, a large part of whom are also 
not directly affected by the attitude of their unions toward 
piece work. The number of those not under the piece sys- 
tem and not directly affected by the attitude of their unions 
thereto, if the members of the time-working unions for 



212 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

whom piece work is not now an issue be included, is close 
to two-thirds of the total union membership under both 
systems. Finally, it is safe to assume that of those affected 
by the union attitude toward piece work, exclusive of course 
of the time- working unions in which it is not an issue, two- 
thirds are willing to accept it, and nearly one-half are 
actually working under it without objection. 

II 
Objections to Piece Work 

As has already been pointed out a system of piece pay- 
ment possesses an advantage from the standpoint of the 
union over time payment, since under the piece system col- 
lective bargaining covers wages more fully than in the case 
of the time system. A union which fixes piece rates is 
establishing the rates actually paid and not mere minimum 
rates. Under a piece scale the more efficient members re- 
ceive wages directly in proportion to their greater efficiency. 
Such a union rate naturally occupies a more important posi- 
tion in the eyes of the individual workman than a mere 
minimum rate. 

An important corollary of the advantage of securing in 
the scale, wages in proportion to efficiency is that of insuring 
that individuals shall not do more work than the average 
without receiving proportionally more pay. Under the 
piece system the union avoids the contingency that some 
members may turn out more work in proportion to the 
wages they receive than the general run of their fellow 
workmen. In some time-working unions in which the prod- 
uct is approximately measurable, as, for instance, in the 
Granite Cutters' Union and the Typographical Union, much 
concern is expressed over the fact that some men do more 
than the average amount of work for the minimum rate 
and that a few do considerably more than the average for 
a wage which is less than proportionately higher. 1 These 

1 Granite Cutters' Journal, February, 1897; February, 1900; June, 
1902, p. 6; June, p. 4, July, p. 4, 1905; Barnett, p. 133. 



The Form of the Rate 213 

individual workmen, it is complained, are turning out work 
at a lower rate per unit than the other members. The tend- 
ency where this is allowed to go on, it is argued, is toward 
an increase in the output required of all for the old daily 
wage. Under the piece system the union avoids this form 
of competition without having to resort to the alternative 
policy of forbidding workmen to exceed the average daily 
output by more than their wages exceed the minimum. The 
piece system has a further advantage in widely competitive 
trades. Inequalities in time rates in different shops or locali- 
ties within the same competitive area are, to be sure, less 
likely to lead to reductions or to prevent increases in local 
wages than inequalities in piece rates. On the other hand, 
the scale is much more likely to be uniform under a piece 
system and if it is uniform the union is likely to be able to 
secure on the average a higher rate of remuneration than 
under the time system. 

The objections to the piece system are of two kinds. In 
the first place, some unions object to the piece system be- 
cause of the fact that a satisfactory unit of measurement 
cannot be devised, or because the piece standard breaks 
down in some one of the ways indicated in Chapter I. It is 
noteworthy, however, that relatively few unions reject the 
piece system for such technical reasons. The important ob- 
jections urged against the piece system are not connected 
with its undesirability as a measure of labor, but with the 
mischievous consequences of its use. It is the effect which 
the system of payment according to the number of pieces 
turned out is believed to have upon the general rate of 
remuneration in terms of output that lies at the root of most 
of the opposition to piece work. Nearly all of the unions 
which oppose it do so mainly because they believe that 
wages will become lower, or at least the output required for 
the average daily wage higher, under this system of pay- 
ment then they would be under the time system. 

As has been said, there are a few unions which em- 
phasize among their objections to piece work the friction 



214 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

and loss occasioned by the difficulties in applying piece scales 
to the work in their trades or the unfairness of attempting 
to pay by the piece for work which is not physically adapted 
to piece payment. This objection is logically distinct from 
the tendency to reductions in wages which is the main 
ground of objection in most unions to the piece system. 
The liability to reductions is itself increased, however, by 
the necessity for frequent pricing of work. The opposition 
to piece work on this ground will therefore be considered 
first. 

The friction and loss of time involved in operating the 
piece scale came very early to be felt as a serious objection 
to piece work in the granite cutting trade. The nature of 
these difficulties has been described in Chapter I. They 
appear to have been in this trade as potent a reason for the 
abolition of piece work as the feeling that piece work 
tended to produce wage reductions. The secretary of the 
national union states that piece work would be preferable to 
time payment if the former could be smoothly and fairly 
administered. Similar difficulties underlie the opposition of 
the Shingle Weavers to piece work. In his 1908 report the 
president in discussing the scales said, " Many deplore the 
lack of detail and find fault that many cases in the growing 
complexity of the shingle industry are not provided for." 
And among the "evils of piece work" he emphasized 
"" the growing difficulties with which we are troubled in try- 
ing to adjust a piece work system to these great varieties of 
•conditions and still maintain some degree of equity among 
*our people as well as to maintain an approximately fair 
^equalization among the manufacturers in the cost of produc- 
tion." 1 Among the Leather Workers on Horse Goods also 
there is complaint that the scales do not standardize the rate 
of remuneration and time payment is suggested as the 
remedy. 2 

The officers of the Ladies' Garment Workers and of the 

1 Report of President, 1908; also Proceedings, 1909, p. 56. 
^Leather Workers' Journal, May, 1904; June, 1907. 



The Form of the Rate 215 

Cloth Hat and Cap Workers give a prominent place to the 
disputes and loss of time accompanying the settlement of 
prices in their reasons for opposing piece work. In these 
trades, particularly in the former, the necessity of making 
almost entirely new scales with each seasonal change of 
styles is responsible for a great deal of the trouble. In the 
Ladies' Garment Workers' shops, too, new work is con- 
stantly coming up for pricing during the season. According 
to the president's report to the 1904 convention, " Fashions 
change with bewildering rapidity and prices must be ad- 
justed almost daily." 1 These are disadvantages in the piece 
system which naturally impress the officers more than the 
individual member, whose immediate interests are involved 
in only a small part of the price disagreements. 

In a few other unions, particularly among the Molders, 
the Blacksmiths, and the Machinists, changes in the physical 
conditions of production for the same patterns are felt to 
make the system of piece payment unfair. This objection 
naturally applies more to those shops in which the nature 
of the products turned out changes frequently than to those 
in which the work is a repetition of familiar patterns. In 
shops of the first character the price is usually set after a 
brief trial of the pattern and this price holds for the dura- 
tion of the job. The officers of these unions contend that 
the material conditions affecting the time required often 
do not remain standard for the life of the price. As these 
patterns are not constantly recurring the equalizing effect 
of the long run is absent. The Molders' officers point out 
that the equipment deteriorates after a time, that the pattern 
becomes " sprung," the flask burned, and the sand " burned 
out," all of which increases the time required to turn out 
the casting. The Machinists' officers state that material, 
as, for instance, steel, even though it is supposed to be of 
uniform quality, is of varying difficulty to cut. The presi- 
dent of the Blacksmiths states that the difficulty of working 
iron is subject to similar variations. The Molders complain 

1 Proceedings, 1904, p. 12. 



216 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

that a further source of unfairness in the piece system 
in many foundries is the liability of non-payment for a cast- 
ing which has been lost without fault on the molder's part. 
The employer seldom pays for these unless it can be shown 
that the molder is clearly not at fault and this is often diffi- 
cult to prove. On small work this is not such an important 
factor, but if a molder loses a large casting it makes a con- 
siderable difference in his wages for the week. 1 

The more important set of objections to piece work 
center about the stimulus that payment by the piece offers 
to the workers to increase their output, and the depressing 
effect of this increased output on the piece rates. These two 
effects, increased output and lower piece rates, are felt to 
be reciprocal. The higher earnings from increased output 
are regarded as leading to reductions in prices, and the 
reduction of the prices leads the workers again to increase 
their output in order to recover their former daily or weekly 
earnings. The final result, it is complained, is that weekly 
wages are no higher than at first, but a much larger output 
is required to secure the same wage. Several other objec- 
tions to piece work often thought of as distinct are really 
consequences of increased output. It is charged, for in- 
stance, that piece work decreases the number of persons 
employed. But this result is due, of course, to the greater 
output of those retained. It is charged that piece work 
exhausts the workers, impairs the quality of workmanship, 
and promotes specialization. These are also evidently due 
to the encouragement of output inherent in the piece system 
and to the increased pressure for output exerted by price 
reductions. The objection that piece work promotes selfish- 
ness and weakens union solidarity rests upon the assump- 
tion that the workmen who are induced to increase their 
output considerably beyond the average thereby injure their 
fellow workmen by reducing the number employed and by 

1 See statement by the president of the union in the Eleventh 
Special Report of the Commissioner of Labor, 1004, Regulation and 
Restriction of Output, p. 150. 



The Form of the Rate 217 

bringing price reductions. These several objections will be 
considered in order. 

The contention that payment by the piece leads to lower 
prices per unit of output than would prevail under the time 
system involves the two assumptions that piece work stimu- 
lates the worker to increase his output and that a reduction 
in price will follow earnings appreciably above those for- 
merly made on work of similar character. The belief that 
a worker will do more work under the piece than under the 
time system appears to be generally held by employers and 
workmen irrespective of connection with a union. 1 That 
higher earnings often lead to reductions in the piece rates 
also admits of no doubt. That reductions will be made 
under such circumstances is a common expectation among 
unionists, and this view is widely shared by non-union 
workmen and employers. 2 It is easy to see why the intro- 
duction of piece work is in many cases followed by reduc- 
tions in the prices. Employers generally set piece prices at 
a point which allows the workers to make their previous 
average wages. If any considerable proportion exceed their 
previous earnings the employer usually assumes that the 
rates have been placed too high and proposes a reduction. 
The reduction, if the workers attempt to regain their wages 
by increasing their output, leads to an increase in the effort 
necessary to secure a given weekly or hourly wage. As the 
result of such reductions the output required for average 
wages, in the opinion of most of the union members opposed 
to piece work, is considerably greater than would be re- 
quired for the same time rate; the greater output of piece 
workers does not lead permanently to proportionately higher 
wages. 

The belief that piece work lowers the average amount of 
remuneration per unit of output is by far the weightiest 

1 Eleventh Special Report of the Commissioner of Labor, p. 17; 
Webb, Industrial Democracy, p. 294; Schloss, Methods of In- 
dustrial Remuneration (3d edition), p. 52. 

2 See, for example, papers and discussions on methods^ of payment 
in Transactions of American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Vols. 
X, XII, XVI, XXIII, XXIV; Webb, p. 292; Schloss, p. 70. 



21 8 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

single objection to piece work and the real source of the 
opposition in most unions. It appears repeatedly in the 
reports of officers, the resolutions of conventions and in the 
correspondence from members in the trade union journals. 1 
It is significant that some of the unions opposed to piece 
work will agree without much resistance to work under the 
piece system if guarantees are given that the prices will not 
be cut or that the average wages will not be reduced below 
a fixed amount. In 1903, for instance, one of the national 
officers of the Molders' Union made an agreement with 
"members of the National Founders' Association making 
locks and hardware in Connecticut " that piece work was to 
be accepted on condition that when a piece price had been 
established for any job, it should not be reduced during 
the life of the agreement, unless "improved methods or 
facilities for molding " were introduced, and that the aver- 
age wages of all the Molders was not to be less than $2.75 
a day nor the wages of the " average molder " less than 
$2.50 a day. The union officer stated that piece work with 
such guarantees was not particularly objectionable. 2 

The belief that the larger output of the piece worker re- 
duces the number of workmen employed is wide spread 
among union members. It is also a belief of long standing. 
The president of the Iron Molders' Union complained in 
1867 that the piece worker does " two days' work in one," 
and thereby keeps others out of employment. 3 In 1876 the 
president of the same union complained that in the agricul- 

1 See, for example, International Journal, January, 1867, p. 308 ; 
April, 1873; May, 1874; Iron Molders' Journal, July, 1876; January, 
1877; March, 1880; September, October, 1885; April, 1886; March, 
May, 1887; January, 1888; December, 1892; March, 1894; 1899, p. 
235; 1903, pp. 26, 648; 1907, p. 894; Machinists' Journal, February, 
1893; 1906, pp. 246, 726; 1907, p. 967; Proceedings, 1907, p. 46; 
Granite Cutters' Journal, August, 1877; January, 1879; April, May, 
1886; July, 1893; Proceedings of Bookbinders, 1898; Proceedings of 
Railway Carmen, 1907, p. 68; Report of General President of 
Laundry Workers, September, 1908; Furriers' Journal, May, 1906; 
April, October, 1907; April, 1908; Proceedings of Shingle Weavers. 
1908, p. 25. 

2 See also Proceedings of the Car Workers, October, 1907, p. 17. 

3 International Journal, July, 1867. 



The Form of the Rate 219 

tural branch one molder turned out as much work as two 
formerly did, and declared that if piece work were abolished 
there would be an increase of one-third in the number of men 
■employed in that branch. 1 The same argument against piece 
work has appeared frequently since that time in the Iron 
Molders' Journal. 2 The Machinists also share this belief. 
In 1893 the editor of the Machinists' Journal declared that 
the first thing to do in order to secure steady employment 
for members was to eliminate piece work. 3 The president 
-of the Bookbinders urged the 1898 convention to move for 
the abolition of piece work on the ground that it " causes 
two men to be employed in doing a task that would require 
three men." 4 

The charge that the piece system leads the workers to 
■exert themselves more intensely than a proper regard for 
health and the conservation of strength for a reasonably 
long working life warrants, is heard more frequently than 
any other objection to piece work except the contention that 
it reduces wages. The exhausting effects of piece work 
are emphasized in those trades in which the work is phys- 
ically heavy. The president of the Blacksmiths' Union 
declares that in his trade the physical injury the piece 
workers do themselves is one of the greatest, if not the 
greatest evil of piece work. He points out that the nature 
of the work itself leads the men on to over-exertion even 
without the stimulus of piece payment, since the workmen 
are often led on to intense exertion by their anxiety to do 

1 Iron Molders' Journal, July, 1876 (Proceedings of Convention). 

2 Iron Molders' Journal, January, 1877; June, 1879; September, 
October, 1885; April, 1886; January, 1888; May, 1899, p. 235; Au- 
gust, 1903, p. 648. 

3 Machinists' Journal, January, 1893, p. 356 ; 1897, p. 218. 

4 Proceedings, _ 1898. See also, Blacksmiths' Journal, September, 
1903. The president of the Flint Glass Workers referring, in his 
report to the convention of 1896, to the fact that some members 
had exceeded the limits established by the union, said "... by 
increasing the output of each shop one fifth, it is as clear as day 
that the opportunities of work in that factory were reduced in the 
same proportion" (Proceedings, 1896, p. 58). Schloss (p. 80), 
referring primarily to British workmen, says that "this belief is in 
a large measure responsible for the unpopularity of piece work." 



220 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

all possible with the metal before it loses the proper degree 
of heat. The exhausting effects of piece work are also em- 
phasized by the Iron Molders. In this trade also, particu- 
larly in floor molding, a considerable degree of physical 
exertion is demanded. 1 The work of the Machinists is as 
a rule not so heavy, but complaint is frequent of the same 
injurious effects. 2 The Granite Cutters also make much of 
the physical results of "rushing" upon the men. The 
" rushers " or " rumpers " in this trade are now usually 
time workers, but "rushing" has occasionally been laid at 
the door of piece work. 3 Sometimes the exhaustion com- 
plained of is more nervous than muscular. The secretary 
of the Amalgamated Glass Workers declares that piece work 
ruins the nerves of the men; that it is the fear that he will 
not get out the work rather than the physical strain which 
affects the workman injuriously. The secretary of the 
Garment Workers also emphasizes the nervous strain of the 
piece system, particularly upon the women workers. 4 

The unionists assume that the over-exertion under the 
piece system is due in most cases to the necessity of reaching 
an unreasonably large output in order to obtain a reason- 
ably large daily wage. This evil effect is thus due to pre- 
vious wage reductions. It is often pointed out, to be sure, 
that the workers who invite reductions by excessive outputs 
are bringing premature retirement upon themselves as well 
as price reductions upon themselves and their fellow work- 
men. But if the high output of the few were not believed 
to result in wage reductions for all there would be little 
union objection to piece work on the ground that it allowed 
a few to injure themselves. It is the exhausting effect upon 

1 Iron Molders' Journal, December, 1885; February, April, 1886; 
March, 1887; December, 1892; March, 1894; May, 1899, p. 235; 
1903, PP. 480, 648; 1907, p. 894. 

2 Machinists' Journal, 1903, pp. 185, 694; 1907, p. 901. See state- 
ment of the president of the Machinists in Eleventh Special Report 
of Commissioner of Labor, p. 121. 

'Granite Cutters' Journal, April, 1886; June, 1893. 

4 Schloss (pp. 60 ff.) discusses at some length the effect on the 
workers of the piece system. The Webbs do not discuss physical 
strain as a trade union objection to piece work. 



The Form of the Rate 221 

the majority which gives the unions real concern, and the 
over-exertion in the case of the majority is attributed to 
previous wage reductions rather than to too great eagerness 
to increase daily wages above a recognizedly fair average. 

Two other results are charged in some trades to the pres- 
sure for quantity of output exerted by the piece system — 
poor workmanship and extreme specialization. These re- 
sults are undesirable in themselves, but they are believed 
also to tend indirectly toward a reduction in the general 
rate of remuneration in the trade. That piece work led to 
poor workmanship was one of the complaints against it 
among the Granite Cutters. 1 The secretary of the Travel- 
lers' Goods and Leather Novelty Workers and the Shingle 
Weavers also regard poor workmanship as one of the evils 
of piece work. 2 The influence exerted toward specialization 
is a ground of objection to piece work particularly in those 
unions which are fighting the system, as for instance, the 
Blacksmiths and Machinists. 3 

Finally, the opposition to piece work by union men is due 
in considerable measure to the feeling that it militates 
against the strength of unionism by encouraging men to 
seek self -advancement at the expense of their fellow- 
workmen. As has been pointed out, this belief assumes that 
those who push their output above the average are bringing 
about price reductions for all employed on that kind of 
work and depriving some of employment. This belief ap- 
pears among the objections urged against piece work in a 
number of unions. 4 It is complained also that where there 
is a difference in the desirability of the work to be done, 

Granite Cutters' Journal, April, 1886; June, 1893. 

2 Proceedings, 1908, p. 215. 

'Machinists' Journal, June, 1894, p. 212; January, 1907, p. 12; 
Proceedings, 1907, p. 100. See also Proceedings of the Book- 
binders, 1896. 

4 International Journal, January, 1867; Iron Molders' Journal, 
June, 1879; March, 1880; April, 1886; 1903, pp. 480, 648; Machinists' 
Journal, August, 1903, p. 694; October, 1907, p. 967; Boilermakers' 
Journal, July, 1908, p. 427; Blacksmiths' Journal, January, 1903; 
Furriers' Journal, April, 1907; Proceedings of the Shingle Weavers, 
1908, p. 25; Proceedings of the Bookbinders, 1898. 



222 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions' 

the solidarity of the men may be further weakened by 
favoritism in the assignment of work. The secretary of the 
Granite Cutters states that favoritism in the distribution of 
the stones was an objectionable feature in the administra- 
tion of the piece system in his trade. 1 

The belief that union experience has shown that piece 
work leads to low wages and general union demoralization 
has influenced some of the union officers who have recently 
urged their organizations to take steps looking towards its 
abolition. The president of the Shirt, Waist and Laundry 
Workers in advising his union in 1908 that the time had 
come to do away with piece work declared that "the most 
progressive organizations in the history of organized labor 
have discarded the piece-work system and are now working 
on the weekly or daily wage system." 2 The president of the 
Ladies' Garment Workers said in his report to the 1903. 
convention : " Regulation and control of a trade in which 
the piece system prevails is almost inconceivable. The most 
powerful labor organizations in America are in those trades 
in which the payment by weekly wages predominates." 3 
The general secretary of the Tailors in appealing to his- 
union in 1905 to abolish piece work also declared that union 
experience had condemned piece work. "The history of 
the labor movement and of the industrial world has demon- 
strated clearly that long hours are almost the universal con- 
comitant of piece work, and it equally shows that long hours 
are accompanied by low wages." 4 

2 The possibility of discrimination against piece workers when 
both piece and time workers were employed on the same job ha<f 
considerable influence in determining the Granite Cutters to de- 
clare for the total abolition of piece work. Complaints were made 
that in giving out work the piece men were kept waiting until the 
time men had been started, that the easiest stones and those paying 
best according to the piece bill were done under the time system, 
and that the piece men were required to finish their stones more 
carefully (Granite Cutters' Journal, March, 1879; August, 1882, 
April, October, 1886; September, 1891 ; December, 1900). The New 
York bill of prices of 1890 and many other bills contained clauses 
prohibiting discriminations of this character. 

2 Report of President, September, 1908. 

8 Proceedings, 1903, p. 9; Proceedings, 1906, p. 11. 

4 The Tailor, February, 1905, p. 3. 



The Form of the Rate 223 

It is this belief that piece work leads to price reductions, 
exhaustion of the workers, and reduction of the number 
employed, and that these effects are traceable to excessive 
output, which accounts for the tendency so often exhibited 
by piece workers to adopt limits to their earnings or output. 
This tendency has appeared among unions which accept 
piece work willingly as well as among those which oppose it. 
The Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel and Tin Work- 
ers, the Flint Glass Workers, 1 and the Window Glass Work- 
ers for years maintained limits of output in their national 
scales, and the scales of the Window Glass Workers and of 
some branches of the Flint Glass Workers still provide 
such limits. The purpose of these regulations is and has 
been to prevent such increases in output as would lead to 
price reductions, discharge of persons employed, and ex- 
haustion of the workers. 2 Where the limits have been 
abandoned, it has been because the unions have been unable 
to maintain them on account of the opposition of the em- 
ployers and the competition of non-union workers. 

The adoption of national limits has been advocated in the 
conventions of other piece-working unions. There was such 
an agitation among the Glass Bottle Blowers for years, 
culminating in the adoption by the 1894 convention of limits 
for the following blast. 3 But these were not enforced and 
were not renewed. 4 The president of the national union in 
a circular issued in 1891 warned the members of the danger 
to prices and to the members' health in "the big day's 
work." He did not, however, favor the adoption of limits, 
but rather the education of the members and the fostering 

*For a description of the prevailing system of limits among the 
Flint Glass Workers, see above, p. 69. 

2 Vulcan Record, I, p. 52; Proceedings of Amalgamated Associa- 
tion of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers, 1877, pp. 53-4; Proceedings, 
1883, pp. 1027, 1 1 15; Proceedings, 1887, p. 1230; Proceedings, 1905, 
p. 7221 ; Proceedings of Flint Glass Workers, 1896, p. 58 ; Proceed- 
ings, 1905; Proceedings, 1906; Proceedings, 1907. 

3 Proceedings, 1892, pp. 21, 133; Proceedings, 1894, pp. 47, 87-90. 

4 Proceedings, 1895, PP- 27, 34, 73-8; Proceedings, 1896, pp. 29, 
69. The opposition of the president of the union to the policy of 
limitation was undoubtedly an important element. 



224 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

of an "understanding among ourselves not to go beyond 
what is reasonable." 1 The preamble of the resolution 
limiting earnings which was adopted by the 1894 convention 
recited that the limits were intended to check excessive out- 
put, which was injurious to the individual, harmful to the 
trade, and resulted in keeping deserving men in idleness. 2 

In the Molders' Union much was heard of limits during 
the years of opposition to piece work in the stove branch. 
Limits were, in fact, maintained by local unions or by shop 
crews in many places, and the question of a national limit 
on the earnings of piece workers was before the national 
union as early as 1873. 3 The convention of 1886 did adopt 
a limit of $3.50 a day for piece workers but left the penalty 
for violations to the local unions. 4 The rule was not uni- 
formly enforced and the 1888 convention repealed it as 
impracticable, leaving each local union to set its own limit 
and punish violations as it saw fit. 5 The agitation for a 
rule of national scope was renewed from time to time. 6 The 
question was before the national convention in 1895 but no 
action was taken. 7 A circular advocating a wage limit was 
sent out by a local union in 1899, but this was vigorously 
opposed in the columns of the official journal. This oppo- 
sition reflected the attitude of the national officers at that 
time toward piece work and toward limits in the stove 
branch. 8 In the spring of 1902 the Molders officially agreed 
with the Defense Association that no limits should be ob- 
served in the stove-molding branch, in view of the agree- 

1 Proceedings, 1892, p. 21. 

2 Proceedings, 1894, p. 90. 

3 International Journal, 1873, p. 196; 1874, pp. 276, 354; Iron Mold- 
ers' Journal, 1875, p. 392; December, 1885; January, February, 
March, October, 1886. 

4 Proceedings, 1886, p. 32. 

5 Proceedings, 1888, pp. 65, 78. 

6 Iron Molders' Journal, May, 1890; August, 1894; April, June, 

1895. 

7 Proceedings, 1895, pp. 64-87. 

8 Iron Molders' Journal, 1899, pp. 235, 278, 303, 363. 



The Form of the Rate 225 

ment that the earnings of the individual molders should not 
be considered in adjusting prices of work. 1 

Local limits have prevailed for years among the Hatters 
in spite of the opposition of the national union to the policy. 2 
Local or shop limits are observed also by the Pen and Pocket 
Knife Grinders, the Table Knife Grinders, the Leather 
Workers, the Brick Makers, the Broom Makers, and the 
Stove Mounters, where the local unions do not have agree- 
ments with the employers similar to that of the stove molders 
with the Defense Association. 3 Limits are also maintained 
but usually less openly by local unions of those piece-working 
unions which are opposed to the piece system. An under- 
standing that certain limits of earnings shall be observed 
is also common in non-union piece-working shops; and 
many employers expect as a matter of course that their 
piece workers will observe such limits. 4 

Ill 
Acceptable Conditions for Piece Work 
Obviously the unions which accept piece work willingly 
have not found that it produces the injurious effects attrib- 
uted to it by the unions which oppose it. If these unions 

1 Clause 17 of the Conference Agreement then adopted reads as 
follows : " Inasmuch as it is conceded by the members of the Stove 
Founders' National Defense Association that the earnings of a 
molder should exercise no influence upon the molding price of 
work, which is set, according to well-established precedent and rule 
of conference agreements, by comparison with other work of a like 
kind, the placing of a limit upon the earnings of a molder in the 
seven hours of molding should be discountenanced in shops of 
members of the S.F.N. DA." In his report to the convention of the 
union a few months later, President Fox took a definite stand 
against limits, save as a refuge against arbitrary exactions (Pro- 
ceedings, 1902, p. 621). 

2 Journal of the United Hatters, March, September, 1899; Pro- 
ceedings, 1900, p. 337. 

3 Attempts have been made, so far unsuccessfully, to introduce 
national limits in some branches of the Potters' trade in order to 
prevent poor workmanship. These have the encouragement of the 
employers (Proceedings, 1905; Proceedings, 1906; Proceedings, 

1007). 

* See, for example, papers and discussions on systems of pay- 
ment in Transactions of American Society of Mechanical Engi- 
neers, Vols. X, XII, XVI. 

15 



226 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

believed that piece work resulted in an appreciably lower 
rate of remuneration per unit of output than would be re- 
ceived under the time system they would prefer the latter. 
The advantages of the piece rate as a means of securing a 
better adjustment of pay to effort would be more than offset 
by the disadvantage of a constant, effective, downward pres- 
sure upon the wage per unit of product. The decisive 
factor in the determination of a union's attitude toward the 
piece system is the extent to which the piece system is 
believed to be accompanied by reductions in prices. In a 
few instances the piece system is accepted because the time 
system is believed to give the worker less protection against 
speeding rather than because prices are not reduced under 
the piece system; but for the most part the question of 
acceptance or opposition to piece work turns on whether 
prices are reduced. This is, of course, a matter of expe- 
rience for each particular union. 

The explanation of the fact that some unions are unable 
to avoid what they consider unjustifiable price reductions 
under the piece system whereas other unions which work 
under it do not suffer such reductions is not to be found 
merely in differences in the comparative strength of the 
unions. Some of the predominantly time-working unions 
which are opposed to piece work are counted among the 
strongest American unions. They may be weak in many 
of the shops in which piece work prevails, because their 
members may avoid those shops when work can be obtained 
elsewhere ; but piece work is opposed also in these unions in 
shops in which nearly all the workers are union members 
and in which the union shop committee is recognized in 
setting prices. Nor will the protection afforded by limits 
complete the explanation. Many unions which accept piece 
work willingly now have no scale limits, whereas in many 
which oppose it attempts are made to secure the observance 
of shop limits. The difference in the effect of piece rates 
on wages appears to be due, in large part at least, to the 
conditions, aside from mere union strength, under which 



The Form of the Rate 227 

the prices are established and may be revised. And differ- 
ences in these conditions are in considerable measure trace- 
able to differences in the character of the product to which 
the piece system is applied. 

One very important condition affecting the liability to 
reduction is the area over which the scale is uniform. It 
is to be noted that over half of the piece-working unions 
which accept the system willingly have national or competi- 
tive district scale systems, and that no predominantly piece- 
working union with such a scale is now opposing the piece 
system for the work covered by it. 1 Several other unions 
in this group have uniform local scales. Only a few of the 
unions in it have separate shop lists which are not bound 
together jn some wider system of equalization. On the 
other hand, the bulk of the piece work done by men opposed 
to the piece system is done under shop lists. This is true 
particularly of the strong unions opposing the piece system. 

Where piece prices are established in a national scale or 
a scale applying over the field of recognized competition, the 
conditions are most favorable for keeping the system free 
from progressive price reductions. The union is able in 
this kind of a wage bargain to marshal its full strength, 
or a larger part of it than could be enlisted in support of 
purely local prices, for each particular item in the scale. 
The employers, on the other hand, are less likely to press 
for reductions of particular prices once established, and this 
for two reasons. First, because the individual employer is 
not impelled to insist on reductions in labor cost in order 
to avoid the danger of paying more than his competitors or 
to obtain an advantage over them, and second, because the 
presumption is much stronger against the contention that a 
particular price in the scale gives earnings considerably 
above the intended scale average. The bulk of the work for 
which national or district scales are adopted in any year is 

1 The Shingle Weavers is the only union with a sectional piece 
scale opposing piece work, and it is a predominantly time-working 
union. Moreover, one of its important objections to piece work is 
the difficulty of applying the piece system to its work. 



228 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

made up of patterns long familiar to the trade. The prices 
to be agreed upon are mostly those to be paid for this 
familiar work. The presumption is against the granting 
of a request that any one price or a few particular prices of 
long standing should be reduced because of the high earn- 
ings made under them. They have come to be accepted as 
standard and probably the workers have adjusted their 
speed to them. 

The method of setting the new piece prices also shuts off 
to a large extent demands for reductions at the next scale 
revision. The new work, as explained in Chapter I, is in 
many cases priced by the application of physical standards, 
and reductions can ordinarily be demanded only on the 
ground that a mistake was made in classifying the pattern. 
Where the work cannot be automatically rated in this way, 
it has usually been made for a short time at least before it 
is priced by the national committees, and the care with 
which national prices are fixed tends to prevent such work 
being entered at prices which gives earnings considerably 
in excess of the scale average for the same intensity of 
exertion. The price reductions insistently demanded in 
national wage conferences are general or uniform percent- 
age reductions from all prices, rather than in particular 
prices on the ground of high earnings on these pieces. 
When high earnings are used as an argument for price 
reductions it is usually in support of a request for a general 
reduction made primarily on some other ground, as, for 
instance, non-union competition. 

These safeguards against price reductions on account of 
high earnings under specific prices are present to a less de- 
gree, but still to an important degree, where the piece scale 
is set for several shops in the same locality. If competition 
in the manufacture of the product is largely local and if the 
new kinds of work each year form but a small proportion 
of the total, the conditions are favorable. If competition is 
appreciably inter-city, reductions in prices or the failure to 
increase them is likely to be attributed to low prices in other 



The Form of the Rate 229 

localties and the remedy is likely to be sought in widening 
the area of scale uniformity rather than in abolishing piece 
work. This is the tendency, for instance, among the pants 
and vest-making branches of the Garment Workers' Union, 
and to a less extent among the Cigar Makers. No strong 
predominantly piece-working union, and few predominantly 
time-working unions, which have had uniform local piece 
scales for any considerable time are actively opposing the 
piece system on such work. 

When we come to the work done under independent shop 
lists we find the way to price reductions much more open. 
The incentive to the employer to secure reductions is greater, 
and the union is bargaining for fewer members. Moreover, 
the prices are fixed less carefully in the first instance, as the 
employer is not made cautious by the knowledge that he 
will have to demand reductions from a joint body of other 
employers and representatives of a much wider union con- 
stituency which will be affected by these reductions. The 
new work is likely to be in much greater proportion, and 
there is less likelihood of the presence of recognized stand- 
ards as to the skill and effort which should be required for 
the average rate of wages. It is the absence of such stan- 
dards which is in largest measure responsible for the ten- 
dency toward reductions under shop lists as the output is 
increased. 

The conditions surrounding the fixing of piece prices are 
at their worst from the union standpoint when the system 
is applied to work of which the bulk cannot be reduced to 
a regular itemized scale in advance, 1 but must be priced as 

1 The fixing of prices even under these conditions is not individual 
bargaining or " sub-contracting." The prices are fixed, or are at 
least subject to ratification, by a shop committee which represents 
the union, not determined finally by the employer or foreman and 
the workman or workmen who are to make the particular pattern. 
The Webbs (Industrial Democracy, pp. 291 ff.) argue that it is 
chiefly because piece work generally means the setting of prices 
under conditions of " individual bargaining," that it is opposed by 
the British trade unions. A great deal of piece work is done by 
American unions opposed to the piece system which is done under 
shop scales or at least under shop prices agreed to by a shop 
committee. 



230 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

it appears. The shop committee is usually bargaining in 
these cases for a few men and is guided only by an estimate 
of the time required, arrived at after a brief trial of the 
work. Although the shop committee is likely to resist re- 
ductions with more tenacity than it shows in fixing prices 
at the outset, the general rate of remuneration in terms of 
exertion is more liable to reduction under these conditions 
than where a regular scale is adopted periodically for the 
bulk of the work. 

The character of the product plays a large part of course 
in the determination of the conditions under which prices 
are established and revised. It affects the proportion of 
new work in the scale, and the extent over which the scale 
may be made uniform is limited by it in considerable degree. 
In some unions the scales have not been made as uniform as 
is physically feasible; independent shop scales often indi- 
cate union weakness rather than physical difficulties in the 
way of wider uniformity. Some predominantly time-work- 
ing unions, too, having adopted the policy of opposition to 
piece work, bend their energies toward its abolition rather 
than to securing more uniformly applicable piece scales for 
such of the work as would allow it. These cases aside, 
however, the physical character of product and processes 
remains a very important determinant of the area over which 
the same scale is applicable and consequently of the degree 
to which the unions experience progressive price reductions 
under the piece system. 

In some unions other conditions than the physical nature 
of the work and the extent over which the scale is uniform 
count appreciably in protecting the workers against price 
reductions. The Boot and Shoe Workers generally prefer 
the piece system and many of their price lists are inde- 
pendent shop lists. Their label contracts usually provide 
that all differences as to prices or wages are to be subjected 
to arbitration. This operates to counteract unjustifiable re- 
ductions. The Stove Molders are, of course, protected by 
their agreement with the Defense Association that prices 



The Form of the Rate 231 

shall be set and maintained in accordance with those already 
established in the district without reference to the earnings 
of the molder. The Mine Workers' prices are established 
in accordance with a competitive district scheme which 
eliminates the question of earnings on all work but that 
which on account of abnormally difficult conditions must be 
priced locally. Even here it is the proportional time re- 
quired rather than the actual earnings of the individual 
which is the direct determinant. In the case both of the 
Stove Molders and of the Miners the protection to prices 
once established and the maintenance of the established 
general rate of remuneration in fixing new prices is due to 
the adoption of the competitive district as the unit in price 
adjustment. Such guarantees would probably not have 
been secured if prices in each foundry or mine were fixed 
independently. 

In some unions the piece system seems to be preferred 
rather because of the greater liability to forced output 
under the time system than because of the feeling of secur- 
ity against reductions of prices under the piece system. The 
preference of the Textile Workers for the piece system is 
accounted for partly on this ground. The output of ma- 
chine operatives in this union depends, skill being equal, 
upon the speed of the machinery, over which the operative 
has no control. If piece prices remain unchanged and the 
speed of the- machinery be increased the earnings of the 
operatives are increased. If payment is by the hour or day 
the operative is obliged to exercise greater care and skill to 
prevent breaks but receives no greater wage. The Webbs 
assign this as the chief reason for the preference of the 
British textile unions for piece work. 1 The secretary of 
the American union states that it is an important consid- 
eration here also. It is not nearly so important as in Eng- 
land, however, as the American textile workers, except the 
Mule Spinners, have in many places no standard price per 
pick or other unit of output, as the British unions have, 

1 Industrial Democracy, p. 288. 



232 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

securing them an increase in wages automatically with h> 
creased speed of the machinery. The American employers 
look to weekly earnings in fixing prices and there is in most 
places no assurance that the increased output will not result 
in reduced prices per hank for spinning or per yard for 
weaving. 

The fear of greater " speeding up " for no greater or even 
less wages under the time system also accounts largely for a 
preference for piece work on the part of a considerable 
minority, if not indeed a majority, of the union members in 
the garment trades. It explains partly the weakening of 
the feeling against piece work among the United Garment 
Workers. The members fear that if piece work were given 
up they would be "speeded up" under the time system by 
the insistence of the employers on excessive " tasks " for 
the daily wage or on work in " teams." Under the " team 
system " each member must turn out his special part of the 
garment as rapidly as the other members turn out their 
parts, so that all must keep up with the pace set by the 
leader. The union men complain that the leader receives 
higher wages in return for maintaining a rapid pace for the 
other members of the team who receive Only the average or 
minimum rate. 1 

1 The Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers 
imposed limits on the output of the day hands on the sheet mill 
who were employed by a roller and with other members of a 
crew receiving piece rates, in order to prevent their output being 
increased without commensurate increase in pay. The national 
officers favored for years putting them on a piece basis. It has 
always been the policy of this union to bring all men possible under 
the tonnage system to prevent the day workers being " speeded up " 
without proportional increase in pay (Proceedings, 1884, p. 1320; 
Proceedings, 1886, p. 1834; Proceedings, 1887, pp. 1917, 1948. 1950 ; 
Proceedings, 1888, pp. 2307, 2326-8; Proceedings, 1890, p. 2897; Pro- 
ceedings, 1899, p. 5586; Proceedings, 1900, pp. 5741, 5909; Proceed- 
ings, 1902, p. 6441 ; Proceedings, 1903, p. 6701 ) . The Webbs state 
that the British coal miners' unions insist on piece work for helpers 
of piece workers for the same reason (Industrial Democracy, p. 
290). The United Mine Workers are opposed to the system of em- 
ploying helpers at time rates which prevails to a large extent in the 
anthracite fields. 



APPENDIX A 

CALCULATION OF OUTPUT IN MULE SPINNING 

The number of yards which will be spun in a given time 
is generally calculated from the number of " stretches " per 
minute. The " stretch " is the outward trip of the movable 
carriage which carries the spindles, or the distance which is 
thus travelled. The twist is put in by the revolution of the 
spindles during the time occupied by the outward run of 
the carriage; or during this time and a brief interval that 
the carriage is stopped before the backward trip is begun. 
The number of stretches per minute must be adjusted to the 
number of turns of twist to be put in — the higher the num- 
ber of turns of twist the longer the time which must be 
allowed for twisting, and the less the number of stretches 
per minute. The number of yards which will be spun per 
spindle in an hour will be 60 multiplied by the number of 
inches in the stretch by the number of stretches per minute, 
divided by 36. The number of stretches will thus vary with 
the number to be spun. On number 36 with a 64 inch 
stretch, the stretches per minute will be, say 5.125 and the 
output per spindle per day of ten hours 5.85 hanks, whereas 
on number 60 the stretches per minute will be about 4.125, 
and the output per spindle 4.70 hanks. 

The variation in the number of stretches per minute does 
not bear an exact or uniformly assumed ratio to the number 
of turns of twist. Some mills may be found running at 
fractionally different numbers of stretches per minute from 
others on the same numbers. On the whole, however, the 
output to be expected under average conditions can be fairly 
well calculated in advance. In a catalogue published by 
the Mason Machine Works of Taunton, Mass., a table of 
the production which may be expected is given for numbers 
from 6 to 78 for a mule with a 64 inch stretch. On number 

233 



234 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

36 the stretches per minute are 5.125 and the output per 
spindle in a 60 hour week, with allowance for cleaning and 
doffing, is .97 pound; on number 60 the stretches per min- 
ute are 4.125 and the weekly output .47. Under the union 
price list for New Bedford (1908) these outputs per spindle 
for a pair of mules carrying 1,800 spindles would give $25.02 
per week for number 36 and $24.92 on number 60. The 
spinners' actual earnings would be considerably less than 
that, as further allowance must be made for stopping, and 
the spinner has to pay the " back boy " from $3.00 to $4.00 
per week from his list prices. 

The English trade agreements which provide prices for 
mule spinning are based upon similar factors. The English 
practice is, however, to give in the scale the price under 
certain conditions for a given number, and the data for cal- 
culating the changes to be made in that with specific varia- 
tions in number or conditions. Under the Oldham spinning 
list, for instance, prices are derived from that for a " stand- 
ard operation." This is the " spinning of cotton yarn by a 
self-actor mule, making three draws (stretches) of 63 inches 
in 50 seconds ; all variations from this standard, whether in 
length of drawing or in number of draws per second are 
provided for by a scale showing the corresponding varia- 
tion in piece-price, while a special list of extras, payable if 
the conditions be otherwise than those contemplated as 
normal, is included." The number of draws per second is 
affected of course by the number of the yarn to be spun. 
Under the Bolton list payment is by weight, and here again 
the price actually to be paid is calculated by applying specific 
differentials to a standard price for a given number of turns 
of twist per inch for mules with a given number of spindles 
(Report of Standard Piece Rates of Wages and Sliding 
Scales in the United Kingdom, 1900. Board of Trade 
(Labor Department), pp. xvii, ff.). 



APPENDIX B 

r 

PREMIUM AND BONUS SYSTEMS OF PAYMENT 

It is very difficult to distinguish between the premium and 
the bonus systems of remuneration, for the two names are 
used almost indiscriminately. The term " bonus " is, how- 
ever, more frequently applied at the present time to any 
•contingent payment, and any plan under which such pay- 
ments are offered is likely to be called a "bonus" plan or 
system. 

The first examples of such plans were, however, known 
as premium plans. Under them the extra payment or pre- 
mium was generally a fixed proportion, usually a half and 
almost never more than a half, of what the workers' regu- 
lar wages would be for the number of hours or minutes by 
which he reduced the time formerly taken on an average to 
turn out a given amount of work. The essentials of the 
system were set forth by Mr. F. A. Halsey, 1 with whose 
name the premium system is most closely associated, in a 
paper read before the American Society of Mechanical En- 
gineers in 1891 and printed in the Transactions of that 
Society for that year, Volume 12, pp. 755 et seq. The 
paper, but not the discussion of it, is reprinted in the Eco- 
nomic Studies of the American Economic Association, Vol- 
ume I (1896), Number 2. 

" The essential principle is ... as follows : The time re- 
quired to do a given piece of work is determined from pre- 
vious experience, and the workman, in addition to his usual 
daily wages, is offered a premium for every hour by which 

1 Systems of payment involving the essential features of the 
"premium plan," that is, extra payments for time saved at rates 
t>elow the regular rate for that time, had been occasionally used in 
the metal trades before Mr. Halsey's plan was proposed. Some of 
these were referred to as "bonus" plans (Transactions, Vol. 8, p. 
469; Vol. 10, p. 622) Vol. 12, p. 767). 

235 



236 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

he reduces that time on future work, the amount of the 
premium being less than his rate of wages. Making the 
hourly premiums less than the hourly wages is the founda- 
tion stone on which rest all the merits of the system, since 
by it if an hour is saved on a given product the cost of the 
work is less and the earnings of the workman are greater 
than if the hour is not saved, the workman being in effect 
paid for saving time. 

" Assume a case in detail : Under the old plan a piece of 
work requires ten hours for its production, and the wages 
paid is thirty cents per hour. Under the new plan a premium 
of ten cents is offered the workman for each hour which he 
saves over the ten previously required. If the time be re- 
duced successively to five hours the results will be as follows : 





Wages 
per Piece 




Total Cost of 


Workman's Earn- 


Hours 


Premium 


Work Col. 2 + 
Col. 3 


ings per Hour 
Col. 4 -f- Col. 1 


IO 


$3.00 


O 


#3 00 


[$ .30 


9 


2.70 


$ -IO 


2.80 


•3 11 


8 


2.4O 


.20 


2.60 


.325 


7 


2.IO 


.30 


2.40 


•343 


6 


I.80 


.40 


2.20 


.366 


5 


I.50 


.50 


2.00 


.40 



The amount of the premium, according to Mr. Halsey, 
should vary with the degree to which the extra output re- 
quires an increased exertion on the part of the worker. In 
1895 he said, "The only system which will endure is the 
one which pays the least possible per piece of product. The 
purpose of these systems is not, primarily, to pay higher 
wages but to produce cheap work, the adjustment sought 
being one which shall give the workman an increased wage 
per day in return for the decreased cost per piece of 
product." 1 

The more recently advocated systems, to which the term 
"bonus" has usually been applied,- seem to have as their 
essential aim the reaching of a specific output considerably 

1 Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 
Vol. 16, p. 885. 



Premium and Bonus Systems of Payment 237 

higher than the previous average. Mr. F. W. Taylor de- 
scribed a system of remuneration before the American So- 
ciety of Mechanical Engineers in 1895, which he called a 
" differential rate system of piece work," in which the cen- 
tral aim was to secure "the largest amount of work of a 
certain kind that can be done in a day." A rising rate per 
piece as the output increased toward the maximum was the 
stimulus offered the worker in the scheme of payment. 1 Mr. 
Taylor insisted then and later that the central point in his 
system was the ascertainment through a determination of 
" unit times," that is, the shortest time in which each sepa- 
rate operation can be performed, of the maximum output 
which can be expected in a given time from good workmen 
working at the highest rate of speed which can be regularly 
maintained. His differential rate system of payment was 
intended as an inducement to the men to maintain that rate 
of output after it had been ascertained. 2 

In 1895, in reply to a criticism that the rise in the rate as 
the output approaches the maximum results in a higher 
labor cost per piece for the enlarged output than would be 
the case under an ordinary piece system, Mr. Taylor said, 
" On the contrary, with the differential rate the price will, 
in nine cases out of ten, be much lower than would be paid 
per piece either under an ordinary piece-work plan or on 
day's work. An illustration of this fact can be seen by 
referring to paragraphs 78 to 83 of the paper, in which it 
will be found that a piece of work for which the workmen 
had received for years, under the ordinary piece-work sys- 
tem, 50 cents per piece, was done under my system for 35 
cents per piece, while in this case the workmen earned $3.50 
per day, when they had formerly made under the fifty cent 
rate only $2.25 per day. 3 ... It is quite true that under the 

1 This paper is also reprinted in the Economic Studies, Volume I, 
No. 2 (Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engi- 
neers, Vol. 16, pp. 856-903). 
2 Transactions, Vol. 16, pp. 875, 903; Vol. 24, pp. 1337^-8- 
3 Tn the case referred to the original output was 4 to 5 a day; the 
maximum was set at 10, and when 10 were produced in a day 35 
cents per piece was paid; when less than 10 were turned out in a 
day less per piece was paid. 



238 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

differential rate the workmen earn higher wages than under 
other systems, but it is not that they get a higher price per 
piece, but because they work much harder, since they feel 
that they can let themselves out to the fullest extent, with- 
out danger of going against their own interests." 1 

In 1901 Mr. H. L. Gantt presented to the same society 
a paper describing a " Bonus System of Rewarding Labor y 
Being a System of Task Work with Instruction Cards and 
a Bonus." Under his plan of payment the specified task is 
made the worker's goal and if he fails to reach it he receives 
no bonus. "If the man follows his instructions, and accom- 
plishes all the work laid out for him as constituting his 
proper task for the day he is paid a definite bonus in addi- 
tion to the day rate which he always gets. If, however, at 
the end of the day, he has failed to accomplish all of the 
work laid out he does not get his bonus but simply his day 
rate. . . . This system is so far as the writer is aware, a 
new one, but it is based on the principles of Mr. Fred. W. 
Taylor's system of elementary rate fixing." 2 

Mr. Harrington Emerson describes a system of bonus 
payment in the Engineering Magazine for February, 1909,, 
which is based on a system of "standard time determina- 
tion." A "standard time" is established, which is consid- 
ered the minimum time in which the given output can be 
reached by the use of the best methods. The worker who 
turns out the work in the " standard " time is said to have 
an " efficiency of one hundred per cent." The workman 
receives a fixed sum and in addition receives as a bonus a 
percentage of his regular rate which increases more than 
proportionally with each per cent, of efficiency attained 
above sixty-seven per cent. At eighty per cent, efficiency, 
for instance, the bonus is 3.27 per cent. ; at ninety per cent., 
9.91 per cent.; at ninety-five per cent., 14.53 P er cent., and 
at 100 per cent, efficiency, it is 20 per cent. If the work- 
man increases the output above the "standard" the bonus 

1 Transactions, Vol. 16, pp. 887 et seq. 

2 Ibid., Vol. 23, pp. 341-372; Vol. 24, p. 1322; Vol. 30, p. 1042. 



Premium and Bonus Systems of Payment 239 

increases one per cent, for each added percentage of effi- 
ciency above 100 per cent.; at 133 i per cent, efficiency, for 
example, the bonus would be 53 J per cent. 

The average output before the introduction of the system 
is considered as 67 per cent, efficiency. A worker who 
reaches 100 per cent, efficiency must turn out 50 per cent, 
more output in a given time than before. Assume, for 
example, that workmen with a wage rate of 40 cents an 
hour have been turning out on an average 6 units of a given 
article in 6 hours. The new "standard time" for 6 units 
is set at 4 hours. One and a half units of output is now 
said to be a "standard hour." If the worker turns out 6 
units in 6 hours, as before, he has made but 4 standard 
hours in 6 hours of working time and his efficiency is but 
67 per cent. Therefore, he receives simply his hourly rate 
of 40 cents and no bonus. If he turns out the 6 units in 
5 hours he has made 4 standard hours in 5 hours of working 
time and his efficiency is 80 per cent. He will now receive 
his regular rate of 40 cents an hour for the five hours 
worked and a bonus of .0327 per cent, of that sum, a total 
of $2.07, or 41.4 cents an hour. If he does the work in 
standard time and turns out the 6 units in 4 hours he has 
made 4 standard hours in 4 hours of working time and 
receives his regular rate for the latter, $1.60, plus 20 per 
cent, of that as a bonus, a total of $1.92, or 48 cents per 
hour. If he should be able to reduce the standard time to 
such an extent that he halves his previous time for the 6 
units, he makes 4 standard hours in 3 working hours and 
his efficiency is 133 J per cent. He would then receive pay 
at his regular rate for the 3 hours, $1.20, plus a bonus of 
53J P er cent - of tnat , a total of $1.84 or 61 J cents an hour. 

The labor cost to the employer, or the price per piece 
received by the worker decreases, of course, as the output 
increases. At the old output, or 6j per cent, efficiency, the 
rate per unit is 40 cents ; at 80 per cent, efficiency it is 34.5 
cents, at 100 per cent., 32 cents, and at 133J per cent., 30I 
cents. 



240 Standard Rate in American Trade Unions 

These plans for bonus payment are frankly intended to 
stimulate the worker to increased effort. Mr. Taylor, Mr. 
Gantt, Mr. Emerson, and Mr. Halsey all assume that most 
workers could considerably increase their outputs under 
present methods without over-exertion. Mr. Taylor said 
in 1903, in advocating his system of work and payment, 
" That there is a difference between the average and the 
first class man is known to all employers, but that the first 
class man can do in most cases from two to four times as 
much as is done on an average is known to but few, and is 
fully realized only by those who have made a thorough and 
scientific study of the possibilities of men. ... It must be 
distinctly understood that in referring to the possibilities of 
a first class man the writer does not mean what he can do 
when on a spurt or when he is over-exerting himself, but 
what a good man can keep up for a long term of years with- 
out injury to his health and become happier and thrive 
under." 1 It appears from other statements of this writer 
that the difference between what the first class man can do 
and what the average man does, lies largely, in his opinion, 
in differences in intensity of effort. 2 Mr. Taylor does, how- 
ever, lay great stress upon the necessity of selecting the 
men who are to be asked to work under his plan. 

Mr. Gantt says that for a "fixed daily wage" the ordi- 
nary workman " will seldom do more than a fraction of the 
work he can do." 3 Mr. Emerson, in describing his own 
efficiency system, quotes Mr. Taylor's views with approval 
and proceeds on the same assumption that the worker, if he 
will, can greatly increase his output without injury to him- 
self. 4 In his first paper, in 1891, Mr. Halsey, speaking of 
the day-work plan, said, "He (the workman) has conse- 
quently no inducement to exert himself and does not exert 
himself." In the same paper, he said, " In certain classes 
of work an increase in production is accompanied with a 

1 Transactions, Vol. 24, p. 1345. 

2 Ibid., Vol. 24, p. 1350; Vol. 16, pp. 864, 878. 

3 Ibid., Vol. 24, p. 267. 

4 Engineering Magazine, May, 1908. 



Premium and Bonus Systems of Payment 241 

proportionate increase of muscular exertion, and if the work 
is already laborious, a liberal premium will be required to 
produce results. In other classes of work increased pro- 
duction requires only increased attention to speeds and feeds 
with an increase of manual dexterity and an avoidance of 
lost time. In such cases a more moderate premium will 
suffice." 1 The same views are reaffirmed by Mr. Halsey in 
an article in the American Machinist, March, 1899. 

Mr. Gantt and Mr. Emerson both emphasize particularly 
that the increased outputs are to come in large part from 
improvements in the methods followed by the workman in 
performing his tasks. The payment of bonuses is advocated 
not only as a means of calling out additional exertion on the 
part of the worker but as an inducement to the workman 
to follow instructions and to cooperate in the introduction of 
methods which increase output with only a fractional in- 
crease in exertion on his part. Their systems are rather 
"efficiency" systems than mere schemes of payment; the 
bonus plans of payment are followed only as a part of the 
general scheme for increasing the efficiency of the working 
force and thereby reducing the labor cost of production. 2 

1 Transactions, Vol. 12, p. 760. 

2 Transactions, Vol. 23, p. 341 ; Vol. 30, p. 1063 ; Engineering 
Magazine, May, 1908-February, 1909, passim. 



16 



INDEX 



Actors' National Protective 

Union, 190. 
Aged members, 105. 
Albany, Cigar Makers of, 127. 
American Economic Association 

Quarterly, 30 (note) ; 
American Economic Association 

Studies, 235, 237 (note). 
American Machinist, 241. 
American Society of Mechanical 

Engineers, 217 (note), 225 

(note), 235-238, 240 (note), 

241 (note). 
American Tin Plate Company, 

149 (note). 
Apprenticeship and time mini- 
mum rate, 103, 104, 115. 
Area of rate, 16, 120-184, 227- 

230. 
Arkansas, Coal Miners of, 134, 

135. 
Arrington, President, 156 

(note). 
Asbestos Workers, see Heat, 

Frost, General Insulators and 

Asbestos Workers. 
Auburn, N. Y., Cigar Makers 

of, 127. 
"Average" rate, 80. 

Bakery and Confectionery 
Workers' International Union, 
86 (note), 87, 100, 191 (note). 

Baltimore, Cigar Makers of, 32 
(note), 54, 61, 125; Coat 
Makers of, 77; Pants Makers 
of, 124 (note) ; Steam Fitters 
of, 164. 

Barbers, International Union of, 
Journeymen, 106, 190. 

Barnett, G. E., (notes) 30, 31, 
59, 69, 78, 102, 112, 125, 173, 
182, 189, 212. 

Barre, Vt., Granite Cutters of, 
80-81, 177 (note). 

"Basic" rate, time, 80, 102, 107 
(note). 



Basic rate, tonnage, in coal min- 
ing, 134-136. 

Bill Posters and Billers, Na- 
tional Alliance of, 172, 190. 

Birmingham, Ala., Iron and 
Steel Workers' scales in, 131. 

Blacksmiths and Helpers, Inter- 
national Brotherhood of, 86, 

88, 107, 112, 118, 165, 169, 170, 
199, 201, 202, 210, 215, 2I9>. 
221. 

Board of Trade, British, Report 
on Standard Piece Rates of 
Wages and Sliding Scales in 
the United Kingdom, 27 
(note), 234. 

Boiler Makers and Iron Ship- 
builders, Brotherhood of, 86, 

89, 100, 112, 118, 165, 169, 170, 
179, 199, 201, 202, 209, 210. 

Bonus system of payment, 111- 
114, 235-241. 

Bookbinders, International 
Brotherhood of, 84, 87, 126* 
182, 199, 200, 219. 

Boot and Shoe Workers' Union,. 
50 (note), 55 (note), 56, 82 
(note), 84, 112, 123, 128. 166V 
187, 188, 230. 

Boston, Granite Cutters of, 80; 
Molders of, 82; Pants Makers 
of, 124 (note) ; Stereotypers 
and Electrotypers of, 119. 
(note). 

Brewery Workmen, Interna- 
tional Union of the United, 
83, 106, 190, 191 (and note). 

Bricklayers' and Masons' Inter- 
national Union, 78, 79, 84, 87,. 
88, 100 (note), 104, 115, 117, 
164 (note), 178, 179, 186, 190, 
191 (note). 

Brick, Tile and Terra Cotta 
Workers' Alliance, Interna- 
tional, 55, 60, 189, 190, 225. 

Bridge and Structural Iron 
Workers, International Asso- 



243 



244 



Index. 



ciation of, 85, 86, 105 (note), 
164, 172, 190. 

Bridgeport, Molders of, 82. 

British Columbia, Shingle 
Weavers of, 133 (note). 

British miners' unions, 232 
(note). 

British textile unions, 231, 234. 

British trade unions, 229 (note). 

Brockton, Boot and Shoe Work- 
ers of, 123. 

Brooklyn, Molders of, 92; Pants 
Makers of, 124 (note). 

Broom and Whisk Makers' 
Union, International, 126, 187, 
188, 225. 

Brush Makers' International 
Union, 124, 143, 198. 

Buffalo, Bricklayers' rate in, 
179; Longshoremen of, 134 
(note); Molders of, 82; rail- 
way yard rates in, 168; Stone 
Cutters of, 08. 

Building trades unions, 79, 85, 

103, 108, 115 (note), 181, 191, 
192, 194. 

Bureau of Labor, U. S., Bul- 
letin of, (notes) 48, 92, 134, 
137. 

California, state rates of Brick- 
layers and Granite Cutters in, 
178; Shingle Weavers of, 133 
(note). 

Carnegie Bros.' Mill, scale of 
Iron and Steel Workers for, 

131. 

Carpenters and Joiners, Amal- 
gamated Society of, 190. 

Carpenters and Joiners, United 
Brotherhood of, 85, 88, 89, 99, 

104, 107, 117, 164 (note), 173, 
179 (and note), 190, 191 
(note), 192, 194 (note), 195. 

Carriage and Wagon Workers, 
International Union of, 86 
(note), 199, 200. 

Car Workers, International As- 
sociation of, 86 (note), 118, 
170, 109, 200 

Cement Workers, American 
Brotherhood of, 86, 100. 

Ceramic, Mosaic and Encaustic 



Tile Layers and Helpers' In- 
ternational Union, 86, 104, 191. 

Chain Makers' National Union, 
133, 187, 188. 

Chicago, Brickmakers of, 55, 60 ; 
Iron and Steel Workers' scale 
in, 131; Machinists of, 107; 
Meat Cutters of, no, 170; 
Molders of, 171 (note); 
Printers of, 31 (note) ; rail- 
road yard rates in, 168 (and 
note) ; Wood Lathers of, 95. 

Cigar Makers' International 
Union, 32, 53, 55, 61, 125, 127, 
187, 188, 229. 

Cincinnati, Iron and Steel 
Workers' district scale for, 
130 (note), 144-146; Molders 
of, 47 (note), 137, 171 (note). 

Classification according to com- 
petency for separate rating, 
94-105. 

Cloth Hat and Cap Makers, 
United, 82 (note), 86 (note), 
173, 196, 215. 

Collective Bargaining, standard 
rate a device for 10; for piece 
rates, 12-15, 36-39, 43, 45, 46, 
48, 49, 50, 132, 134-142, 145, 
146 (note), 147 (note), 149, 
151-152, 155, 159, 160, 226-231; 
for time rates, 10-13, 166, 167, 
168, 169, 172 (note), 173 
(note). 

Columbus, Iron, Steel and Tin 
Workers of, 129 (note), 130 
(note), 144-146. 

Commercial Telegraphers' Union, 
190, 191. 

Commissioner of Labor, 
Eleventh Special Report of> 
217 (note), 220 (note). 

Commissions, provision for in 
time scales, 106. 

Commons, J. R., (notes) 48, 137, 
203. 

Comparative difficulty of pro- 
duction, as basis of piece rate- 
differentiation, 20-22, 23, 45, 
46, 50, 56, 228-230; physical 
factors available as indices of, 

23-33. 
Competency, and time minimum 
rate, 15-16, 94-106, ii4-"9; 



Index. 



245 



and admission to union mem- 
bership, 16, 114-115. 

Competition, and area of rate, 
126, 134-141, 143, 147, 153, 161, 
163, 173, 181-184; and price re- 
ductions, 227-231; and time 
rates, 97~ I0 o, 105, 116, 182, 
212; standard rate intended to 
prevent, 10. 

Composition Roofers, Damp 
and Waterproof Workers, In- 
ternational Brotherhool of, 
118 (note), 191. 

Compressed Air Workers' 
Union, International, 87, 172, 
190. 

Concord, N. H., Granite Cut- 
ters of, 81, 176, 177 (note). 

Connecticut, agreement of 
Founders of, 218. 

Coopers' International Union, 
126, 173, 187, 188. 

Core Makers' International 
Union, 85 (note). 

Cost of living and area of rates, 
137 (note), 138 (and note), 
171, 183, 184 (and note). 

Cotton Mule Spinners, see 
Spinners' Association, Na- 
tional. 

Cotton weavers, see Textile 
Workers, United. 

Cutting Die and Cutter Makers, 
International Union of, 82 
(note), 190. 

Danbury, Hatters of, 161 (note). 
Danville, 111., basic rate in coal 

mining, 136. 
Defective materials, provision in 

piece scales for, 65-69. 
Denny, J. L., President, 154 

(note). 
Denver, railroad yard rates in, 

169 (note). 
District rates, 120, 128-142, 143, 

166-171, 177, 227-228, 231. 
Druggists' Ware Glass Blowers' 

League, 155. 

East Liverpool, Potters of, 158- 

159- 
Efficiency, relation to time wages 
as affected by the minimum 



rate policy, 106-119; as basis 
of rating, 94-106. 

Elastic Goring Weavers, Amal- 
gamated Association of, 28, 
50 (note), 142, 187, 188. 

Electrical Workers, Interna- 
tional Brotherhood of, 86 (and 
note), 115, 190, 191 (note). 

Elevator Constructors, Inter- 
national Union of, 86, 105 
(note), 179 (note), 190. 

Emerson, Harrington, 238, 240, 
241. 

Engineering Magazine, 238, 240 
(note), 241 (note). 

England, see British. 

Equalized price lists, 121-123. 

Fall River, cotton weaving 
prices of followed as guide, 
27 (note) ; sliding scale of 
Textile Workers in, 78. 

Federation of Labor, American, 
99 (note), 186. 

Flint Glass Workers' Union, 
American, 35, 36 (note), 37- 
39, 42-45, 46, 60 (note), 68, 
70-72, 123 (note), 129, 132, 
142, 150-153, 157, 172, 186, 187, 
188, 219 (note), 223. 

Form of rate preferred by 
unions, 17, in (note), 185- 
232. 

Foundry Employes, International 
Brotherhood of, 190. 

Fox, Martin, President, 205, 225 
(note). 

Frey, J. P., (notes) 48, 137, 203. 

Fur Workers, International As- 
sociation of, 196. 

Gantt, H. L., 238, 240, 241. 

Garment Workers, United, 35, 
46, 77, 81, 82 (note), 84, 87, 
109, 112, 121, 124, 126, 127, 143, 
160, 166, 173, 196, 197, 220, 229, 
232. 

Glass Bottle Blowers' Associa- 
tion, 35, 36-37, 40-41, 42, 46, 
50 (note), 56-58, 67, 133 
(note), 142, 15S-158, 187, 188. 

Glass Bottle Blowers' League, 
Eastern, 155, Western, 155. 

Glass Workers' International 



246 



Index. 



Association, Amalgamated, 86 
(note), 199, 200, 220. 

Glove Workers' Union, Inter- 
national, 56, 86 (note), 124, 
196. 

Gold Beaters' National Union, 
United, 142, 187, 188. 

Granite Cutters' International 
Association, 33~35, 78, 79-8i, 
84, 86, 87, 88, 100, 104, 105 
(and note), 107 (note), 109 
(note), 117, 118, 126, 173-178, 
179, 184 (note), 190, 191 
(note), 193, 194, 212, 214, 220, 
221, 222 (and note). 

Great Lakes, rates for, of Long- 
shoremen, 54, 84, 134 (note), 
167; of Marine Engineers, 
167; of Seamen, 166. 

Green Glass Workers' Associa- 
tion, 156. 

Halsey, F. A., 235, 240, 241. 

Hardwick, Vt, Granite Cutters 
of, 81. 

Hatters, United, 55, 69, 122, 127, 
143, 160-162, 187, 188, 225. 

Heat, Frost, General Insulators, 
and Asbestos Workers, Na- 
tional Association of, 86, 190. 

Helpers, provision for payment 
of in piece-working trades, 
61-65, 232 (note) ; separate 
minimum rates for 86, 104 
(and note). 

"Hendrickson, W. F., 132 (note). 

Hocking Valley, basic rate in 
coal mining, 136. 

Hod Carriers and Building 
Laborers' Union, Interna- 
tional, 87, 118, 190. 

Homestead Strike, 148. 

Horse Shoers' International 
Union, Journeymen, 190, 191. 

Hotel and Restaurant Em- 
ployes' International Alliance 
and Bartenders' International 
League, 86 (note), 190. 

Illinois, Coal Miners of, 83, 134- 
136, 167; Coal Operators of, 
134-136; Iron, Steel and Tin 
Workers of, 129 (note), 130 
(note), 144-147. 



"Improvers," 104, 105. 

Indiana, Coal Miners of, 134- 
136, 167; Iron, Steel and Tin 
Workers of, 129 (note), 130 
(note), 144-147. 

Indian Territory, Coal Miners 
of, 134, 135. 

Industrial Commission, Report 
of, 59 (note). 

Industrial Workers of the 
World, 187. 

Intensity of Exertion, and piece 
work, 213, 216, 219-221, 223- 
225, 231-232; and premium and 
bonus systems, 112, 240-241. 

Interior Freight Handlers and 
Warehousemen, 100, 190. 

Iron and Steel Heaters, Rollers 
and Roughers, Associated 
Brotherhood of, 129, 130 
(note). 

Iron and Steel Roll Hands, 
Grand Lodge of the National 
Union of, 130 (note). 

Iron Molders, see Molders' 
Union, International. 

Iron, Steel and Tin Workers, 
Amalgamated Association of, 
28, 32, 50-53, 59, 60, 61, 62-65, 
68, 70, 72, 123 (note), 129-131, 
142, 143-150, 154 (note), 187, 
188, 223. 

Jersey City, Molders of, 92. 
Jewelry Workers' Union, Inter- 
national, 199, 200. 

Kansas, Coal Miners of, 134, 
135. 

Kentucky, Iron, Steel, and Tin 
Workers of, 129 (note), 130 
(note), 144-146. 

Knights of Labor, General As- 
sembly of the, 187; District 
Assemblies, No. 143 and No. 
149, 155-156; Local Assembly, 
No. 300, 132, 154. 

Label, union, and area of rate, 
128 (note), 160, 173, 179. 

Lace Operatives, Chartered So- 
ciety of the Amalgamated, 28, 
142, 187, 188. 

L a d i e s' Garment Workers' 



Index. 



247 



Union, International, 84, 121, 
123, 198, 214-215, 222, 232. 

Lancashire, cotton weavers' 
prices in, 27. 

Lathers, see Wood, Wire, and 
Metal Lathers. 

Laundry Workers, see Shirt, 
Waist and Laundry Workers' 
International Union. 

Launer, Wm., Secretary, 155 
(note). 

Leather Workers on Horse 
Goods, United Brotherhood 
of, 173, 196, 214, 225. 

Leather Workers' Union, Amal- 
gamated, 124, 187, 188. 

Limits of Output, 67-72, 109, 
no, 223-225. 

Lithographers' International 
Protective and Beneficial As- 
sociation, 82 (note), 87, 173, 
190. 

Local rates, 120, 124-128, 163- 
166, 181-184, 228-229. 

Locomotive Engineers, Grand 
International Brotherhood of, 
72-76, 101, 118, 141, 168, 183, 
186. 

Locomotive Firemen and En- 
ginemen, Brotherhood of, 72- 
76, 118, 141, 168, 183, 186. 

Longshoremen, Marine and 
Transport Workers' Associa- 
tion, International, 50 (note), 
54, 83, 134 (note), 166, 167, 
183, 188, 190. 
Lowell, Mass., Molders of, 82. 
Lumber Carriers' Association of 

the Great Lakes, 167. 
"Lumping," 194. 

Machine Printers' Beneficial As- 
sociation (Textile), 172, 186, 
190. 

Machinists, International Asso- 
ciation of, 87, 89, 06 (note), 
100, 103, 107, in, 117, 118, 119, 
164, 165 (and note), 169, 182, 
184 (note), 199, 201-202, 206- 
209, 210, 215, 219, 220, 221. 

Maine, Granite Cutters of, 175. 

Maintenance-of-Way Employes, 
International Brotherhood of, 
190. 



Manchester, N. H., Granite Cut- 
ters of, 177 (note). 
Marble Workers, International 
Association of, 85, 86, 87, 104, 
179, 190. 
Marine Engineers' Beneficial 
Association, National, 167, 186, 
190. 
Maryland, Iron, Steel and Tin 
Workers of, 129 (note), 130 
(note), 131, 147 (note); 
Steam Fitters of, 164. 
Maximum rate, minimum rate 
not intended to be, 10, 77, 79, 
106, 108. 
Meat Cutters and Butcher 
Workmen, Amalgamated, 109, 
134 (note), 170, 190, 191 
(note). 
Membership of unions, 186, 188, 

190, 196, 198, 199, 210-212. 
Metal Polishers, Buffers, Platers, 
Brass Molders, Brass and 
Silver Workers' International 
Union, 86 (note), 124, 166, 
196. 
Michigan, Iron, Steel and Tin 
Workers of, 129 (note), 130 
(note) , 144-147 ; Shingle 
Weavers of, 133 (note). 
Mileage system of payment in 
railway service, 72-76, 141, 
183. 
Miners, Western Federation of, 

187. 
Mine Workers, United, 50 
(note), 54, 59, 83, 134-136, 
166, 167, 187, 188, 231, 232 
(note). 
Minimum Rate, 9, 10, n, 15-16, 
77-119, 212, 231; Area of, 120, 
163-181, 181-184. 
Milwaukee, Molders of, 119. 
Minnesota, Shingle Weavers of, 

133 (note). 
Missouri, Bricklayers of, 79; 
Granite Cutters of, 178; Coal 
Miners of, 134, 135- 
Molders' Union, International, 
35, 47-49, 65-67, 78, 79, 82, 85 
(note), 90-94, 102, 103, 107, 
no, in, 119, 121 (note), 122, 
134, 136-140, 164, 165 (note), 



248 



Index. 



171, 182, 189, 199, 201, 202- 
206, 210, 215, 218, 220, 224, 231. 

Mule Spinners, see Spinners' As- 
sociation, National. 

Musicians, American Federation 
of, 190, 191. 

Nailers, United, 130 (note), 144 
(note). 

National Association of Manu- 
facturers of Pressed and 
Blown Glass Ware, 44 (note). 

National Founders' Association, 
91 (and note), 102, 103, no, 
138 (note), 171, 206, 218. 

National rates, 120, 142-162, 171- 
177, 181-184, 227-228. 

Newark, N. J., Molders of, 79. 

New Bedford, price system of 
Mule Spinners of, 25, 234. 

New England, Granite Cutters' 
rates in, 79, 107 (note), 175- 
*77> 193; weaving price sys- 
tem in, 26-27. 

New Jersey, Iron, Steel and Tin 
Workers of 129 (note), 130 
(note), 131, 147 (note) ; 
Molders of, 92 (note) ; Win- 
dow Glass Workers of, 132, 
154. 

New York City, Bricklayers of, 
79, 164 (note) ; building trades 
of, 115 (note); Carpenters of, 
164 (note) ; Composition 
Roofers of, 118 (note) ; 
Granite Cutters of, 80, 105, 
1935 Journeyman Stone Cut- 
ters' Society of, 99 (note) ; 
Ladies Garment Workers of, 
123; Marble Workers of, 85; 
Molders of, 92; Painters of, 
164 (note) ; Pants Makers of, 
124 (note) ; Plasterers of, 79 ; 
Printers of, 78, 125; Steam 
Fitters of, 118 (note) ; Stereo- 
typers and Electrotypers of, 
119 (note) ; Stone Cutters of, 
97-99; Wood Carvers of, 96 
(note). 
New York State, Cigar Makers 
of, 127; Iron, Steel and Tin 
Workers of, 129 (note), 130 
(note), 131, 147 (note); 
Molders of 92 (note), 140; 



Window Glass Workers of, 
132, 154. 

Ohio, Iron, Steel and Tin Work- 
ers of, 129 (note), 130 (note), 
144-146; Miners of, 134-136, 
168. 

Ohio Valley, Flint Glass Work- 
ers of, 70, 133 (note), 150, 
153. 

Oregon, Granite Cutters of, 178; 
Shingle Weavers of, 133 
(note). 

Output, see Intensity of 'Exer- 
tion, and Restriction of. 

Painters, Decorators, and Paper- 
hangers, Brotherhood of, 79, 
85, 87, 89, 100, 104, 164 (note), 
165 (note), 179 (note), 192 
(note), 199, 201. 

Paper and Pulp Makers, Inter- 
national Brotherhood of, 199. 

Pattern Makers' League, 77, 190, 
191. 

Pavers, Rammers, Flaggers, 
Bridge and Stone Curb Set- 
ters, International Union of, 
86 (note), 87, 190. 

Paving Cutters' Union, 198. 

Pen and Pocket Knife Grinders' 
and Finishers' National Union, 
187, 188, 225. 

Pennsylvania, Bureau of In- 
dustrial Statistics of, Report 
of, 51 (note). 

Pennsylvania, Coal Miners of, 
134-136, 232 (note) ; Iron, 
Steel and Tin Workers of, 129 
(note), 130 (note), 131, 147 
(note); Molders of, 140; 
Window Glass Workers of, 
132, 154- 

Percentage advances in time 
rates, 77, 107. 

Philadelphia, Garment Workers 
of, 81; Granite Cutters of, 80; 
Iron, Steel and Tin Workers 
of, 131 (note), 147 (note); 
Molders of, 48, 93, 122, 137; 
Printers of, 125. 

Photo-Engravers, International 
Union of, 86 (note), 191. 



Index. 



249 



Piano and Organ Workers' In- 
ternational Union, 124, 196. 

Piece Rate, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13-15, 
212-213; see Piece Scale and 
Piece Work. 

Piece Scale, area of, 120, 121- 
163, 181-184, 227-230; con- 
struction and operation of, 
13-15, 19-69, 213-216; fea- 
tures of, 18; function of, 13, 
18. 

Piece scale as basis for time 
wages, 80, 105, 107 (note). 

Piece Work, attitude of unions 
toward, 185-212; not feasible 
in some trades, 191, 198 
(note), 199, 202; objections of 
unions to, 213-225; reasons 
for accepting, 225-232. 

Pittsburgh, Bricklayers of, 179; 
Flint Glass Workers of, 70, 
150, 153; district scale of Iron, 
Steel and Tin Workers of, 
63, 126, 130 (note), 144-147. 

Plasterers' International Asso- 
ciation, Operative, 78, 79, 84, 
85 (and note), 104, 186, 191. 

Plumbers, Gas Fitters, Steam 
Fitters and Steam Fitters' 
Helpers, United Association 
of Journeymen, 85, 86, 104, 
179 (note), 191, 194 (note). 

Post Office Clerks, United Na- 
tional Association of, 191. 

Potters, The National Brother- 
hood of Operative, 28, 35, 36, 
45 (and note), 60, 70, 72, 123 
(note), 133 (note), 142, 158- 
160, 187, 188, 225 (note). 

Potters' National Union, 159. 

Powder and High Explosive 
Workers, United, 187, 188. 

Premium System of payment, 
111-114, 235-241. 

Print Cutters' Association, 82 
(note), 105 (note), 172, 191. 

Printers, see Typographical 
Union, The International. 

Printing Pressmen and Assist- 
ants' Union, International, 78, 
86, 182, 191. 

Providence, Granite Cutters of, 
80; Molders of, 82, 91 (note). 

Puddlers, see Sons of Vulcan, 



and Iron, Steel and Tin 
Workers, Amalgamated Asso- 
ciation of. 

Quarry Workers' International 

Union, 191. 
Quincy, Mass., Granite Cutters 

of, 81, 175, 176, 177 (note). 

Railroad Telegraphers, Order 
of, 191. 

Railroad Trainmen, Brotherhood 
of, 72-76, 118, 141, 168, 183, 
186. 

Railway Carmen, Brotherhood 
of, 86 (note), 100 (note), 118, 
170, 186, 199, 200. 

Railway Clerks, International 
Association of, 186, 191. 

Railway Conductors, Order of, 
72-76, 118, 141, 168, 183, 186. 

Rastall, Samuel, 31 (note). 

Reductions in prices, under piece 
system, 213-214, 216, 217-218, 
223, 225-232; under premium 
and bonus systems, 113. 

Republic Iron and Steel Com- 
pany, 149 (note). 

Restriction of Output, 108-110, 
154, 223-225. 

Retail Clerks' International Pro- 
tective Association, 106, 191. 

Rochester, Cigar Makers of, 127. 

Saint Louis, Flint Glass Work- 
ers of, 153; Iron, Steel and 
Tin Workers of, 144-146; 
Molders of, 82, 139. 

Saw Smiths' Union, 172, 199, 
200. 

Schloss, D. F., (notes) 217, 219, 
220. 

Seamen's Union, International, 
86 (note), 87, 166, 183, 191. 

Sheet Metal Workers' Inter- 
national Alliance, Amalga- 
mated, 179 (and note), 191 
(and note). 

Shingle Weavers' Union, Inter- 
national, 58 (note), 133, 199, 
200, 214, 221, 227 (note). 

Shipwrights, Joiners and Caulk- 
ers' Union, International, 191. 

Shirt, Waist and Laundry 



250 



Index. 



Workers' International Union, 
84, 87, 173, 199, 201, 222. 

Shop price lists, 121-124, 163, 
229-231. 

Slate and Tile Roofers' Union, 
International, 164, 179 (note), 
191. 

Slate Workers, International 
Union of, 189, 190. 

Sons of Vulcan, United, Na- 
tional Forge of, 126 (note), 
129 (note), 130 (note). 

Specialization, and piece work, 
216, 221; union opposition to, 
88, 89. 

Spedden, E. R., 173 (note). 

Spinners' Association, National, 
24-25, 50 (note), 61, 69, 124, 
187, 188, 231, 233-234. 

Springfield, Mass., Molders of, 
82. 

Standard rate, definition of, 9; 
function of, 10; see Piece 
Rate and Time Rate. 

State minimum rates, 177, 184. 

Stationary Firemen, Interna- 
tional Brotherhood of, 191. 

Steam Engineers, International 
Union of, 87, 191. 

Steam, Hot Water and Power 
Pipe Fitters and Helpers, In- 
ternational Association of, 86, 
105 (note), 118 (note), 164, 
179 (note), 191. 

Steel and Copper Plate Printers' 
Union, National, 189, 190. 

Steel Plate Transferrers' Asso- 
ciation, 189, 190. 

Stereotypers and Electrotypers' 
Union, International, 86 
(note), 87, 105 (note), 115, 
119 (note), 182, 191. 

Stone Cutters' Association, 
Journeymen, 88, 97~99> 105 
(note), 108, 118, 164, 177, 179- 
181, 191 (and note), 192, 195. 

Stove Founders' National De- 
fense Association, 48, 65, 137- 
139, 141, 171, 205, 224, 225, 
230. 

Stove Mounters and Steel 
Range Workers' International 



Union, 48 (note), 140, 173, 
187, 188, 225. 

Street and Electric Railway Em- 
ployes, Amalgamated Associa- 
tion of, 100, 118, 191. 

Subcontracting, 194 (and note), 
229 (note). 

Switchmen's Union, 118, 168 
(and note), 183, 191. 

Sylvis, W. H., President, 203 
(note). 

Syracuse, Cigar Makers of, 127. 

Table Knife Grinders' National 
Union, 142, 187, 188, 225. 

Tailors' Union, Journeymen, 35, 
47, 50 (note), 126, 127, 198, 
222. 

"Task" system, 109, no, 232; 
and bonus system, in, 112, 
238. 

Taylor, F. W., 237, 240. 

Teamsters, International 
Brotherhood of, 86 (note), 
106, 191, 192. 

"Team" system, 232. 

Texas, Coal Miners of, 134, 135; 
Stone Cutters of, 177. 

Textile Workers, United, 25-27, 
78, 84 (note), 124, 187, 188, 
231. 

Theatrical Stage Employes, In- 
ternational Alliance of, 86 
(note), 172, 191. 

Time Rate, 9, 10, n, 15-16, 77- 
81; see also Minimum Rate. 

Tin Plate Workers' Interna- 
tional Protective Association, 
142, 187, 188. 

T i p Printers, International 
Brotherhood of, 189, 190. 

Tobacco Workers' International 
Union, 126, 188, 190. 

Toledo, Molders of, 82 (note). 

Travellers' Goods and Leather 
Novelty Workers' Interna- 
tional Union, 124, 196, 221. 

Trenton, Potters of, 158-159. 

Troy, Cigar Makers of, 127; 
Molders of, 122, 138. 

Typographical Union, Interna- 
tional, 30-32, 59, 69, 78, 84, 87, 
100, 112, 119, 125, 126, 173, 
182, 189, 190, 212. 



Index. 



251 



Typothetae, United, 101. 

Unemployment and piece work, 
216, 218, 223, 224. 

Uniform advances in time rates, 
77, 106-107. 

Uniformity, in time wages, in- 
fluence of union minimum 
toward, 106-119; territorial, in 
rates, see Area. 

Upholsterers' International 
Union, 199, 201. 

Utica, Cigar Makers of, 127. 

Wall Paper Machine Printers' 
and Color Mixers' Associa- 
tion, 86 (note), 87, 172, 190. 

Warne, F. Julian, 134 (note). 

Washington, D. C, Columbia 
Society (Printers) of, 31 
(note) ; Granite Cutters of, 
105. 

Washington, Shingle Weavers 
of, 133 (note). 

Watch Case Engravers' Inter- 
national Association, 199, 200. 

Weavers, see Textile Workers, 
United. 

Webb, Sidney and Beatrice, 
(notes) 9, 217, 220, 229, 231, 
232. 



Western Bar Iron Association, 
149 (note). 

Wheeling, Iron, Steel and Tin 
Workers of, 144-146. 

Window Glass Workers, Local 
Assembly 300, Knights of 
Labor, 154-155. 

Window Glass Workers, Na- 
tional, 29, 60, 61, 62, 67, 129, 
131-132, 142, 154, 186, 187, 188, 
223. 

Wire Weavers' Protective Asso- 
ciation, American, 142, 187, 
188. 

Wisconsin Iron, Steel and Tin 
Workers of, 129 (note), 130 
(note), 144-147; Shingle 
Weavers of, 133 (note). 

Wood Carvers' Association, In- 
ternational, 95, 96, 192 (note), 
199, 200. 

Wood, Wire and Metal Lathers' 
International Union, 86 
(note), 95, 109, 164, 179 
(note), 189, 190, 192. 

Wood Workers' International 
Union, Amalgamated, 85 
(note), 89, 107, 173, 179, 192 
(note), 199, 200. 

Worcester, Molders of, 82, 91 
(note). 



VITA 

David Aloysius McCabe was born March 8, 1883, in 
Providence, R. I. He received his earlier education in the 
public schools of North Attleboro, Mass., and prepared for 
college in the High School of that town. In 1900 he entered 
Harvard College. He received the degree of A.B. from that 
College in 1904. From September, 1904, to September, 
1905, he was engaged in investigations in Ireland, England, 
and Scotland for the Department of Agriculture and Tech- 
nical Instruction for Ireland. From 1905 to 1908 he acted 
as an instructor in Political Economy in the Catholic Uni- 
versity of America. In October, 1906, he entered the Johns 
Hopkins University. His major subject was Political Econ- 
omy, his first subordinate Political Science, and his second 
subordinate History. He was a University Fellow for the 
year 1908-9. 



252 



THE STANDARD RATE IN AMERICAN 
TRADE UNIONS 



BY 
DAVID A. MCCABE 



A DISSERTATION 

Submitted to the Board of University Studies of The Johns 
Hopkins University in Conformity with the Requirements 
for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 
1909 



Baltimore 
1912 






LBJa'\3 



